Glenn Beck: Pelosi's book bombs




Book link: Know Your Power

GLENN: Nancy Pelosi has -- oh, by the way, hello, you sick twisted freak. From Radio City in Midtown Manhattan, third most listened to show in all of America. My name is Glenn Beck. Nancy Pelosi is still blocking offshore drilling. Stop the music. Listen to this one. She is still blocking offshore drilling even though now a majority, slim that it may be, a slim majority of Californians now favor offshore drilling. What? Now a majority, slim majority now favor offshore drilling. Those are Californians that are for it. Wow. Nancy Pelosi's awfully popular. By the way, I saw -- last night on the Drudge Report -- I don't know if it's still there. On the Drudge Report Nancy Pelosi's book was, like, 800 something -- it was like -- let me go to the Drudge Report now. It was like 843 last night. She's got a new book out. I just clicked on the Drudge Report and looked for the story. Last night when I went to bed, I look it up and I see. There was like 843 and I went, oh, my gosh. Nancy Pelosi, she's 843. But you know what? That will spike. Her new book is coming out. That will spike because now Drudge has that and people will be clicking on the book because they don't -- oh, God forbid Nancy Pelosi looks bad. It was 843 when I went to bed last night. Now after a full 12 hours or so of Nancy Pelosi being on the front page of the Drudge Report about her book, she's now climbing the charts. She's down to number 1,610 on Amazon.com. So that was pretty -- that's pretty good. Actually, you know what? I've spent some time looking for other books.

VOICE: And now another book currently more successful than Nancy Pelosi's book.

GLENN: Well, it's -- I mean, there's -- you know, there's a couple -- you know, the obvious big-time author, Tori Spelling, has sTORI Telling. It's a small S and then TORI, sTORI telling, like Tori Spelling? Isn't that funny (laughing)? She's beating Nancy Pelosi.

VOICE: This has been another piece of crap book that's a smaller piece of crap than Nancy Pelosi's book.

GLENN: Wait, wait, wait. I've got more.

VOICE: And now another book currently more successful than Nancy Pelosi's book.

GLENN: More successful than Nancy Pelosi right now on the best seller list, the Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society book.

VOICE: This has been another piece of crap book that's a smaller piece of crap than --

GLENN: Stop, stop, stop. I got a better one.

VOICE: And now another book currently more successful than Nancy Pelosi's book.

GLENN: It's been out for a year. "An Inconvenient Book."

VOICE: This has been another piece of crap book that's a smaller piece of crap than Nancy Pelosi's book.

GLENN: Well, I resent that. It's not a piece of crap book. It's just been out for a year and yet I'm proud to say my book, "An Inconvenient Book," beating Nancy Pelosi.

You know what, let me tell you something. This is how out of touch the Democrats are. Nancy Pelosi is -- I mean, could she be more unpopular right now? This is what you get when you vote against something and not for something. I think most people voted against the Republicans in the last tour of duty there at the voting booth. I think most people were voting against the Republicans and so they voted for people like Nancy Pelosi. And now Nancy Pelosi is blocking legislation to start offshore drilling. They are -- the country's crying out, would you please start drilling. But congress has gone on vacation for a month. Now, some Democrats, this according to the San Francisco Chronicle, some Democrats are getting ancy fearing the party's stance could hurt them in the fall elections, but Pelosi insists opening new areas to drilling won't lower gas prices in the short-term. Well, how about the long term, Nance? She believes a vote would only help the GOP blame the Democrats for high gas prices. She says, "I will not give this administration an excuse for its failure." You know what, are you four? I don't care whose fault it is quite honestly, Nancy. Let me give you the benefit of the doubt. You didn't get us here alone. The Republicans had lots of opportunity to do it. They didn't do it, either. You both suck. Now fix the problem. She's blocking a vote on offshore drilling because in her own words, quote: I'm trying to save the planet.

Stu, could you just look up, could you Google for me something real quick?

STU: Surely, Glenn.

GLENN: Okay. Could you just Google the oath that members of the house of representatives have to take when they put their hands on the Bible?

STU: Sure, I'll look it up.

GLENN: All right. Just look it up for me real quick. That should be pretty -- she says, I'm not going to be diverted from a political tactic from a course of action that has a big picture view. A vision about an energy independent future that reduces our dependence on fossil fuels and focuses on those renewables that are protective for the environment. I am trying to save the planet.

Do you have it yet, Stu?

STU: Glenn, I'm searching oath for the house of representatives and I'm going to save the planet, and I do not see it.

GLENN: Can you just search for the oath? I'd like to -- let me just hear the oath that she took.

STU: I don't see it yet. Hold on.

GLENN: I believe it's protect, defend the Constitution of the United States, so help me God. I believe that's what it is.

STU: My computer's not working, Glenn. I can't tell you what it is.

GLENN: All right. Is that the new technology?

STU: Yeah, new technology is coming.

GLENN: You know what, it's coming soon. Don't worry about it. Stu okay.

GLENN: Protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. I believe that's what it is. From all, you know, from -- what is it, all threats, foreign and domestic. I don't, I don't -- I'm sorry, I don't see "Save the planet" in anybody's -- does anybody want that as the oath of office for the speaker of the house or any member of congress or the President of the United States? Does anyone want the "Save the planet" in? Because we can vote on that. Why don't we vote on that, shall we? Save the planet. Now, I know right now there are some hippie dope-smoking San Francisco listener going, "This guy hates, man, if we save the planet, we'll save ourselves. Why do you hate the planet? You can destroy the planet and not exist." It's crazy because usually hippies are the ones that have the bumper stickers, "Act locally, think globally." Saving the planet would require us thinking locally. I believe if we save ourselves, we'll save the planet. Now, how could I possibly say something as crazy as that? I don't know. I mean, I'm watching the Olympic games starting next week where, you know, everybody's wearing surgical masks, you know, and you can't even see -- everybody's eyes are red. They had to go out and take slaves from the countryside and clean out all of the algae in the harbor there because of industrialized waste. No, but don't worry. We're the big problem. Once you destroy America, once you cripple America and America no longer has the economic power in the world to be able to be the industrial leader, to be the intellectual leader, to be the economic power, once you put us on the ropes and make us dependent on places like Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and China, oh, my gosh, you're right. The planet's going to be fixed. Because I believe that China, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, I believe those countries will be much more kind to the environment than we could ever be. Don't you agree? I mean, Russia, they're so cute and cuddly. China, oh, I just love them to pieces. Oh, it's great. And you know what? They take those bodies out of the rice paddies when they drown the little children in the rice paddies. The government takes that's out. They don't leave them to decay. Of course, if they would decay in the rice paddies, it might make good fertilizer. Have they thought of that? Somehow or another we're the big enemy. And these people think that if we cripple ourselves somehow or another, the planet's going to get greener. I mean, do these people -- have they read the newspaper lately? Has Nancy Pelosi -- or has she been busy on her book? She's probably been busy on her book. I wonder if there's another -- hang on, let me look for another book that is beating Nancy Pelosi right now. Oh, got one.

VOICE: And now, another book currently more successful than Nancy Pelosi's book.

GLENN: More successful than Nancy Pelosi's new book, My Horizontal Life, a Collection of One-Night Stands.

VOICE: This has been another piece of crap book that's a smaller piece of crap than Nancy Pelosi's book.

GLENN: Do they read the paper or are they busy trying to write their own books? Are they paying attention at all to what's going on?

From the moment the 33-year-old Thomas Jefferson arrived at the Continental Congress in Philadelphia in 1776, he was on the radical side. That caused John Adams to like him immediately. Then the Congress stuck Jefferson and Adams together on the five-man committee to write a formal statement justifying a break with Great Britain, and their mutual admiration society began.

Jefferson thought Adams should write the Declaration. But Adams protested, saying, “It can't come from me because I'm obnoxious and disliked." Adams reasoned that Jefferson was not obnoxious or disliked, therefore he should write it. Plus, he flattered Jefferson, by telling him he was a great writer. It was a master class in passing the buck.

So, over the next 17 days, Jefferson holed up in his room, applying his lawyer skills to the ideas of the Enlightenment. He borrowed freely from existing documents like the Virginia Declaration of Rights. He later wrote that “he was not striving for originality of principle or sentiment." Instead, he hoped his words served as “an expression of the American mind."

It's safe to say he achieved his goal.

The five-man committee changed about 25 percent of Jefferson's first draft of the Declaration before submitting it to Congress. Then, Congress altered about one-fifth of that draft. But most of the final Declaration's words are Jefferson's, including the most famous passage — the Preamble — which Congress left intact. The result is nothing less than America's mission statement, the words that ultimately bind the nation together. And words that we desperately need to rediscover because of our boiling partisan rage.

The Declaration is brilliant in structure and purpose. It was designed for multiple audiences: the King of Great Britain, the colonists, and the world. And it was designed for multiple purposes: rallying the troops, gaining foreign allies, and announcing the creation of a new country.

The Declaration is structured in five sections: the Introduction, Preamble, the Body composed of two parts, and the Conclusion. It's basically the most genius breakup letter ever written.

In the Introduction, step 1 is the notificationI think we need to break up. And to be fair, I feel I owe you an explanation...

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another…

The Continental Congress felt they were entitled by “the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" to “dissolve the political bands," but they needed to prove the legitimacy of their cause. They were defying the world's most powerful nation and needed to motivate foreign allies to join the effort. So, they set their struggle within the entire “Course of human events." They're saying, this is no petty political spat — this is a major event in world history.

Step 2 is declaring what you believe in, your standardsHere's what I'm looking for in a healthy relationship...

This is the most famous part of the Declaration; the part school children recite — the Preamble:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That's as much as many Americans know of the Declaration. But the Preamble is the DNA of our nation, and it really needs to be taken as a whole:

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

The Preamble takes us through a logical progression: All men are created equal; God gives all humans certain inherent rights that cannot be denied; these include the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; to protect those rights, we have governments set up; but when a government fails to protect our inherent rights, people have the right to change or replace it.

Government is only there to protect the rights of mankind. They don't have any power unless we give it to them. That was an extraordinarily radical concept then and we're drifting away from it now.

The Preamble is the justification for revolution. But note how they don't mention Great Britain yet. And again, note how they frame it within a universal context. These are fundamental principles, not just squabbling between neighbors. These are the principles that make the Declaration just as relevant today. It's not just a dusty parchment that applied in 1776.

Step 3 is laying out your caseHere's why things didn't work out between us. It's not me, it's you...

This is Part 1 of the Body of the Declaration. It's the section where Jefferson gets to flex his lawyer muscles by listing 27 grievances against the British crown. This is the specific proof of their right to rebellion:

He has obstructed the administration of justice...

For imposing taxes on us without our consent...

For suspending our own legislatures...

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us...

Again, Congress presented these “causes which impel them to separation" in universal terms to appeal to an international audience. It's like they were saying, by joining our fight you'll be joining mankind's overall fight against tyranny.

Step 4 is demonstrating the actions you took I really tried to make this relationship work, and here's how...

This is Part 2 of the Body. It explains how the colonists attempted to plead their case directly to the British people, only to have the door slammed in their face:

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury...

They too have been deaf to the voice of justice... We must, therefore... hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

This basically wrapped up America's argument for independence — we haven't been treated justly, we tried to talk to you about it, but since you refuse to listen and things are only getting worse, we're done here.

Step 5 is stating your intent — So, I think it's best if we go our separate ways. And my decision is final...

This is the powerful Conclusion. If people know any part of the Declaration besides the Preamble, this is it:

...that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved...

They left no room for doubt. The relationship was over, and America was going to reboot, on its own, with all the rights of an independent nation.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The message was clear — this was no pitchfork mob. These were serious men who had carefully thought through the issues before taking action. They were putting everything on the line for this cause.

The Declaration of Independence is a landmark in the history of democracy because it was the first formal statement of a people announcing their right to choose their own government. That seems so obvious to us now, but in 1776 it was radical and unprecedented.

In 1825, Jefferson wrote that the purpose of the Declaration was “not to find out new principles, or new arguments, never before thought of… but to place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm… to justify ourselves in the independent stand we are compelled to take."

You're not going to do better than the Declaration of Independence. Sure, it worked as a means of breaking away from Great Britain, but its genius is that its principles of equality, inherent rights, and self-government work for all time — as long as we actually know and pursue those principles.

On June 7, 1776, the Second Continental Congress met in Philadelphia at the Pennsylvania State House, better known today as Independence Hall. Virginia delegate Richard Henry Lee introduced a motion calling for the colonies' independence. The “Lee Resolution" was short and sweet:

Resolved, That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved.

Intense debate followed, and the Congress voted 7 to 5 (with New York abstaining) to postpone a vote on Lee's Resolution. They called a recess for three weeks. In the meantime, the delegates felt they needed to explain what they were doing in writing. So, before the recess, they appointed a five-man committee to come up with a formal statement justifying a break with Great Britain. They appointed two men from New England — Roger Sherman and John Adams; two from the middle colonies — Robert Livingston and Benjamin Franklin; and one Southerner — Thomas Jefferson. The responsibility for writing what would become the Declaration of Independence fell to Jefferson.

In the rotunda of the National Archives building in Washington, D.C., there are three original documents on permanent display: the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence. These are the three pillars of the United States, yet America barely seems to know them anymore. We need to get reacquainted — quickly.

In a letter to his friend John Adams in 1816, Jefferson wrote: “I like the dreams of the future, better than the history of the past."

America used to be a forward-looking nation of dreamers. We still are in spots, but the national attitude that we hear broadcast loudest across media is not looking toward the future with optimism and hope. In late 2017, a national poll found 59% of Americans think we are currently at the “lowest point in our nation's history that they can remember."

America spends far too much time looking to the past for blame and excuse. And let's be honest, even the Right is often more concerned with “owning the left" than helping point anyone toward the practical principles of the Declaration of Independence. America has clearly lost touch with who we are as a nation. We have a national identity crisis.

The Declaration of Independence is America's thesis statement, and without it America doesn't exist.

It is urgent that we get reacquainted with the Declaration of Independence because postmodernism would have us believe that we've evolved beyond the America of our founding documents, and thus they're irrelevant to the present and the future. But the Declaration of Independence is America's thesis statement, and without it America doesn't exist.

Today, much of the nation is so addicted to partisan indignation that "day-to-day" indignation isn't enough to feed the addiction. So, we're reaching into America's past to help us get our fix. In 2016, Democrats in the Louisiana state legislature tabled a bill that would have required fourth through sixth graders to recite the opening lines of the Declaration. They didn't table it because they thought it would be too difficult or too patriotic. They tabled it because the requirement would include the phrase “all men are created equal" and the progressives in the Louisiana legislature didn't want the children to have to recite a lie. Representative Barbara Norton said, “One thing that I do know is, all men are not created equal. When I think back in 1776, July the fourth, African Americans were slaves. And for you to bring a bill to request that our children will recite the Declaration, I think it's a little bit unfair to us. To ask our children to recite something that's not the truth. And for you to ask those children to repeat the Declaration stating that all men's are free. I think that's unfair."

Remarkable — an elected representative saying it wouldn't be fair for students to have to recite the Declaration because “all men are not created equal." Another Louisiana Democrat explained that the government born out of the Declaration “was used against races of people." I guess they missed that part in school where they might have learned that the same government later made slavery illegal and amended the Constitution to guarantee all men equal protection under the law. The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments were an admission of guilt by the nation regarding slavery, and an effort to right the wrongs.

Yet, the progressive logic goes something like this: many of the men who signed the Declaration of Independence, including Thomas Jefferson who wrote it, owned slaves; slavery is evil; therefore, the Declaration of Independence is not valid because it was created by evil slave owners.

It's a sad reality that the left has a very hard time appreciating the universal merits of the Declaration of Independence because they're so hung up on the long-dead issue of slavery. And just to be clear — because people love to take things out of context — of course slavery was horrible. Yes, it is a total stain on our history. But defending the Declaration of Independence is not an effort to excuse any aspect of slavery.

Okay then, people might say, how could the Founders approve the phrase “All men are created equal," when many of them owned slaves? How did they miss that?

They didn't miss it. In fact, Thomas Jefferson included an anti-slavery passage in his first draft of the Declaration. The paragraph blasted King George for condoning slavery and preventing the American Colonies from passing legislation to ban slavery:

He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights to life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating and carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere... Determined to keep open a market where men should be bought and sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce.

We don't say “execrable" that much anymore. It means, utterly detestable, abominable, abhorrent — basically very bad.

Jefferson was upset when Georgia and North Carolina threw up the biggest resistance to that paragraph. Ultimately, those two states twisted Congress' arm to delete the paragraph.

Still, how could a man calling the slave trade “execrable" be a slaveowner himself? No doubt about it, Jefferson was a flawed human being. He even had slaves from his estate in Virginia attending him while he was in Philadelphia, in the very apartment where he was writing the Declaration.

Many of the Southern Founders deeply believed in the principles of the Declaration yet couldn't bring themselves to upend the basis of their livelihood. By 1806, Virginia law made it more difficult for slave owners to free their slaves, especially if the owner had significant debts as Jefferson did.

At the same time, the Founders were not idiots. They understood the ramifications of signing on to the principles described so eloquently in the Declaration. They understood that logically, slavery would eventually have to be abolished in America because it was unjust, and the words they were committing to paper said as much. Remember, John Adams was on the committee of five that worked on the Declaration and he later said that the Revolution would never be complete until the slaves were free.

Also, the same generation that signed the Declaration started the process of abolition by banning the importation of slaves in 1807. Jefferson was President at the time and he urged Congress to pass the law.

America has an obvious road map that, as a nation, we're not consulting often enough.

The Declaration took a major step toward crippling the institution of slavery. It made the argument for the first time about the fundamental rights of all humans which completely undermined slavery. Planting the seeds to end slavery is not nearly commendable enough for leftist critics, but you can't discount the fact that the seeds were planted. It's like they started an expiration clock for slavery by approving the Declaration. Everything that happened almost a century later to end slavery, and then a century after that with the Civil Rights movement, flowed from the principles voiced in the Declaration.

Ironically for a movement that calls itself progressive, it is obsessed with retrying and judging the past over and over. Progressives consider this a better use of time than actually putting past abuses in the rearview and striving not to be defined by ancestral failures.

It can be very constructive to look to the past, but not when it's used to flog each other in the present. Examining history is useful in providing a road map for the future. And America has an obvious road map that, as a nation, we're not consulting often enough. But it's right there, the original, under glass. The ink is fading, but the words won't die — as long as we continue to discuss them.

'Good Morning Texas' gives exclusive preview of Mercury One museum

Screen shot from Good Morning Texas

Mercury One is holding a special exhibition over the 4th of July weekend, using hundreds of artifacts, documents and augmented reality experiences to showcase the history of slavery — including slavery today — and a path forward. Good Morning Texas reporter Paige McCoy Smith went through the exhibit for an exclusive preview with Mercury One's chief operating officer Michael Little on Tuesday.

Watch the video below to see the full preview.

Click here to purchase tickets to the museum (running from July 4 - 7).

Over the weekend, journalist Andy Ngo and several other apparent right-leaning people were brutally beaten by masked-gangs of Antifa protesters in Portland, Oregon. Short for "antifascist," Antifa claims to be fighting for social justice and tolerance — by forcibly and violently silencing anyone with opposing opinions. Ngo, who was kicked, punched, and sprayed with an unknown substance, is currently still in the hospital with a "brain bleed" as a result of the savage attack. Watch the video to get the details from Glenn.