Glenn Beck: Higher gas prices . . . good?


Glenn Beck is seen here on the Insider Webcam, an exclusive feature available only to Glenn Beck Insiders. Learn more...

GLENN: From Radio City in Midtown Manhattan, third most listened to show in all of America. Hello, you sick twisted freak. I want to take you back in a flashback all the way back to April 2006. Gasoline in April 2006, $2.91. It has jumped 33 cents in a single month. That was up from $2.58. That's March of 2006. What was happening in March of 2006? Well, we were in the middle of a heated midterm election. Democrats ready to pounce on the high price of gasoline. Remember Chuck Schumer standing in front of the gas pumps: We need an investigation on price gouging; there's no reason this gas should be this expensive.

Here's what Nancy Pelosi had to say about the cost of gasoline. Quote: With record gas prices, record CEO pay packages, record oil company profits, Speaker Hastert and the majority congress continue to give American people the empty rhetoric rather than join Democrats who are working to lower gas prices now.

This is a very important thing I need you to remember. "Join Democrats who are working to lower gas prices now."

She went on: Democrats have a common sense plan to help bring down the skyrocketing gas prices. Remember, Democrats have a common sense plan to help bring down skyrocketing gas prices, by cracking down on price gouging. Okay, here's what they've done, crackdown on price gouging. I believe it's 11 different studies have shown, now funded by you, the taxpayer and the federal government, 11 different studies have shown there is no price gouging, 11. She wanted to roll back the billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies, tax breaks and royalty relief given to big oil and big gas companies. She haven't done that, nor should they do that. See Russia. Russia is doing the opposite. It will hurt the industry and cause your gas to go up. Also if you need proof of it, go back to 1978 where we've done it before. It was a huge, huge mistake. Or don't you remember the gas lines. Of course you do. Then she said she wanted to increase the production of alternative fuels. They have done this. It's great. Have you seen the price of corn?

Let me give you an unrelated story. Corn is likely to be rationed and not used as ethanol this summer as the precious crop that feeds the globe suffers record devastation from recent Midwest flooding. It's at an all-time high, $8 a bushel, a four fold hike from the last two seasons. Its jump is the equivalent of seeing $80 crude oil in 2006 hitting $320 a barrel. There may not be enough corn this summer and some areas aren't even going to have any for sale. Producers are considering rationing of corn which would prevent depletion of the already slim corn reserves. We're going to have to start rationing in ethanol, feed and exports. Ethanol is one of the largest uses of corn. It will consume half of the U.S. corn harvest in six years. So they got that one done. Thanks, congress.

Now, according to this campaign promise, remember Democrats are working on lower gas prices right now. Democrats have a common sense plan to help bring down skyrocketing gas prices. According to this campaign promise it would -- the way I read it, it seems that Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats actually want lower gas prices. Granted, the ideas won't get you there, but let's just float the idea that Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats want lower gas prices. Right? Or have they been lying to you the whole time?

Fast-forward June 2008. Oh, look at this. Here we are in the heat of yet another campaign. Gas prices are over $4 a gallon nationwide. Highest ever. Here is what the Democratic nominee for President, Barack Obama, recently said about the out-of-control -- they used Nancy Pelosi's word -- skyrocketing gas prices. He was talking to John Harwood on MSNBC. To answer Harwood's question, if high prices might be a good thing, here's what he said.

SENATOR OBAMA: I have been that we have been slow to move in a better direction when it comes to energy usage, and the President thankfully hasn't had an energy policy. And as a consequence we've been consuming energy as if it's infinite. We now know that our demand is badly outstripping supply, with China and India growing as rapidly as they are.

HARWOOD: So could high prices help us?

SENATOR OBAMA: I think I would have preferred a gradual adjustment. The fact that this is such a shock to American pocket books is not a good thing.

GLENN: Stop just a second. He would have preferred a gradual adjustment. Have you ever heard that campaign promise from anyone in congress, conservative, Democrat, Republican? Have you ever heard anybody say I'd like a gradual raise of gases, besides environmental kooks? Those are the only ones that would say that. He just said, I would have preferred a gradual adjustment. The fact that it's a shock to the American pocketbook is not a good thing. But then listen to what he says.

SENATOR OBAMA: But if we take some steps right now to help people make the adjustment, first of all by putting more money into their pockets but also by encouraging the market to adapt to these new circumstances more quickly, particularly U.S. automakers.

GLENN: Okay, all right. So he wants to put more money in U.S. pockets. Well, how do you do that? Because we're borrowing money left and right. I guess you could cut taxes. But then that would lead me to the front page of the Wall Street Journal today. Obama plans spending boost and possible cuts in business tax. Listen to the most incredible phrase I have ever heard from someone who is probably going to be our next President. This is an American candidate for President. Globalism and technology and automation all hurt the position of the workers. Wait a minute. Technology. Globalization, technology and automation all weaken the position of workers. Quote: A strong government hand is needed to assure the wealth is distributed more equitably.

Sorry? A stronger government hand needs to redistribute wealth? Excuse me? Read the article on the front page of today's Wall Street Journal. So when he says if we take steps right now, by putting more money in people's pocket books, he doesn't mean all people. He means a strong government hand that can more equitably make sure that the wealth is redistributed. Is this sounding like anything about America, the kind of America that you recognize or grew up in?

Now, let me -- just a simpleton here, try to figure out the Democrat policy shift here on gas prices. It has gone from doing whatever it takes to lower gas prices in 2006, we're going to do all of these things to lower gas prices in 2006, and it has morphed into I'd rather have a gradual adjustment in gas prices. Is that right? I mean, I'm not a gas price expert but I am a thinker. I think it's generally a good thing when the price goes down. Call me crazy, call me whacky, just call me a hate monger because you will anyway. But the Democrats don't seem to be worried about the lowering of the price of fuel for Americans. They are worried about making the price increase not happen so quickly. I'm sorry. Is this starting to sound like France to you, without alternative energy, without 80% of your power coming from nuclear power?

Now, I find it curious that Obama wants the U.S. automakers to adapt quickly to the changing prices. Translation: Smart cars and Priuses. But it's more than just that. What we have here is a fundamental belief that high gas prices are not only a good thing but a moral thing. Oh, get out your hymnals, America, because we're about to sing the praises. Amen, love the planet, thank you, Jesus. I only need to have you turn in your hymnals to the editorial page of the New York Times. Amen, brother, preach on. Thomas Friedman's opinion piece: Truth or consequences. I'm going to link it in my e-mail newsletter today. It's free. It's at GlennBeck.com. You can read the whole mind-boggling editorial. It will give you good insight into what the radical leftists like Obama are thinking when they cheer on high gas prices, and here it is.

He's talking about cynical solutions for high gas prices and this is how he describes Chrysler's recent promotion to pay for gas if you buy a car. Yeah, I know it's a crazy capitalist idea. Here it is. Quote: Reckless initiatives like the Chrysler Dodge Jeep offer to subsidize gasoline for three years for people who buy its gas guzzlers are the moral equivalents of tobacco companies offering discounted cigarettes to teenagers. It's the moral equivalent? Really? Hmmm. Well, what does that make the United States government with the subsidies, with the tax breaks? I guess that's a better, more consistent case to stop it. But why wouldn't you just outlaw it? I've never understood that when it comes to cigarettes. Why not just outlaw them? If they're so horrible, why not outlaw instead of making money on a tax. The moral equivalent of giving cigarettes to children. Really?

But the madness doesn't end there. Friedman also suggests a bottom floor, a price of $4 a gallon for gasoline. Remember, our country is not built like Europe. We have been built on cheap fuel. We have been built on cheap energy. Every expert I have talked to says it ain't gonna last long, there's no way you can just keep all of these prices as high as they are for fuel because it affects everything. He says that if the price dips below $4, let's say to $3, the government -- in Friedman's perfect world, and doesn't it sound like one -- would then just tax the difference between $3 and $4. So we would always have $4 a gallon gasoline or higher.

Why? Because, quote: Now that it's $4 a gallon, the government should at least keep it there since it's having the right effect, end quote. That's right, forget what you want. The activist left is getting their way. They hate SUVs. They hate consumption. You can't consume as much with high prices. So they want to keep them there. Perhaps the biggest reason to increase the gas price is taxes. Since everybody seems willing to follow everything the environmentalists say, if we just follow their lead in wanting to increase the gas tax to offset the carbon we pump into the air, it would be an additional 12 cents a gallon for gas in carbon tax alone. Americans burn an average of 160 billion gallons of gasoline every year. That means $20 billion in newfound money. It's free. Just added tax revenue. I mean, just offsetting the cost of global warming. That's all that is.

Obama is becoming the first presidential candidate ever to actually push for higher gas prices. That's how much in step with you he is. Seems like an impossible argument but from a guy who people don't really even listen to. They just like to look at him and go, wow, what a big crowd behind him, you can get away with it. The arguments are starting to come out now. Let me predict that you're going to hear arguments soon. Like the moral argument to giving cigarettes to teenagers, you are going to hear that it's better for the environment to use less gasoline, you'll hear about how wonderful it will be to drive an uncongested roads because you'll only drive when you need to and all the cars will be smaller and people will take mass transit. And don't we all love the bus system?

Just as at one time in our history I thought it was unthinkable for us to have an income tax, just as unthinkable when there was a time that both parties in Washington D.C. would just keep jacking up our taxes, both sides would say, higher taxes, more spending. It was just unthinkable just a few years ago. We are now going to see the unthinkable. We're going to see the age of politicians trying to convince us that higher gas prices is good. Higher gas prices affect your food. It affects everything you buy. But just two years ago Democrats gained power by promising lower gas prices. Clearly not only did that happen but they are actively cheering on higher gas prices now. So the question really I only have for the candidate is, which is it? Higher or lower? And whose hand is it that is going to steer this government to make sure that everybody's paying their fair share, to make sure that the wealth is redistributed equitably.

Everything comes down to the two Senate runoffs in Georgia. If we lose both races, we lose the country. Democrats know this and are pouring in millions to usher in a Marxist agenda.

As the Left tries to hide how radical the two candidates really are, Glenn takes us inside the Democrat war room to expose the wolf in pastor's clothing, Raphael Warnock, and America's Justin Trudeau, Jon Ossoff. Socialism, the Green New Deal, and "defund the police" are all on the table. And Glenn warns of what's to come if conservatives don't activate: Chuck Schumer will weaponize the Senate, and the radical Left will launch an all-out assault to ravage the Constitution.

Watch the full special below:

The election and its aftermath are the most important stories in America. That's why we're offering our most timely discount ever: $30 off a one-year subscription to BlazeTV with code "GLENN." With BlazeTV, you get the unvarnished truth from the most pro-America network in the country, free from Big Tech and MSM censors.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) joined the "Glenn Beck Radio Program" to explain how mail-in ballots are typically disqualified during recounts at a far higher rate than in-person, Election Day ballots, and why this is "good news" for President Donald Trump's legal battle over the election.

"One of the things that gives the greatest cause for optimism is, this election ... there's a pretty marked disparity in terms of how the votes were distributed. On Election Day, with in-person voting, Donald Trump won a significant majority of the votes cast on in-person voting on Election Day. Of mail-in voting, Joe Biden won a significant majority of the votes cast early on mail-in voting," Cruz explained.

"Now, here's the good news: If you look historically to recounts, if you look historically to election litigation, the votes cast in person on Election Day tend to stand. It's sort of hard to screw that up. Those votes are generally legal, and they're not set aside. Mail-in votes historically have a much higher rate of rejection … when they're examined, there are a whole series of legal requirements that vary state by state, but mail-in votes consistently have a higher rate of rejection, which suggests that as these votes begin being examined and subjected to scrutiny, that you're going to see Joe Biden's vote tallies go down. That's a good thing," he added. "The challenge is, for President Trump to prevail, he's got to run the table. He's got to win, not just in one state but in several states. That makes it a lot harder to prevail in the litigation. I hope that he does so, but it is a real challenge and we shouldn't try to convince ourselves otherwise."

Watch the video clip below to catch more of the conversation:

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.

Subscribe to BlazeTV today with our BEST DEAL EVER for $30 off with promo code GLENN.

Fox News senior meteorologist Janice Dean is perhaps even more disgusted with New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) for his coronavirus response than BlazeTV's Stu Burguiere (read what Stu has to say on the subject here), and for a good reason.

She lost both of her in-laws to COVID-19 in New York's nursing homes after Gov. Cuomo's infamous nursing home mandate, which Cuomo has since had scrubbed from the state's website and blamed everyone from the New York Post to nursing care workers to (every leftist's favorite scapegoat) President Donald Trump.

Janice joined Glenn and Stu on the "Glenn Beck Radio Program" Tuesday to ask why mainstream media is not holding Gov. Cuomo — who recently published a book about his leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic — accountable?

"I'm vocal because I have not seen the mainstream media ask these questions or demand accountability of their leaders. [Cuomo] really has been ruling with an iron fist, and every time he does get asked a question, he blames everybody else except the person that signed that order," Janice said.

"In my mind, he's profiting off the over 30 thousand New Yorkers, including my in-laws, that died by publishing a book on 'leadership' of New York," she added. "His order has helped kill thousands of relatives of New York state. And this is not political, Glenn. This is not about Republican or Democrat. My in-laws were registered Democrats. This is not about politics. This is about accountability for something that went wrong, and it's because of your [Cuomo's] leadership that we're put into this situation."

Watch the video excerpt from the show 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.

As America grows divided and afraid to disagree with the Democrats' woke plan for America, Megyn Kelly is ready to fight back for the truth. For nearly two decades, she navigated the volatile and broken world of the media. But as America leans on independent voices more than ever, she's breaking new ground with "The Megyn Kelly Show."

She joined the latest Glenn Beck Podcast to break down what's coming next after the election: Black Lives Matter is mainstream, leftists are making lists of Trump supporters, and the Hunter Biden scandal is on the back burner.

Megyn and Glenn reminisce about their cable news days (including her infamous run-in with then-presidential candidate Donald Trump) and to look into the chaotic and shady world of journalism and the growing entitlement it's bred. For example, many conservatives have been shocked by how Fox News handled the election.

Megyn defended Fox News, saying she believes Fox News' mission "is a good one," but also didn't hold back on hosts like Neil Cavuto, who cut off a White House briefing to fact check it — something she never would have done, even while covering President Obama.

Megyn also shared this insightful takeaway from her time at NBC: "Jane Fonda was an ass."

Watch the full podcast here:

Want to listen to more Glenn Beck podcasts?

Subscribe to Glenn Beck's channel on YouTube for FREE access to more of his masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, or subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.