Glenn Beck: Why did Barack pick Biden?

August 25, 2008

The Glenn Beck Program

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. Stu, I want to do a couple of things here. I'd like to get the audio from yesterday with Biden, or from Saturday with Biden that I found disturbing.

STU: It was a little disturbing, yes.

GLENN: So you know what I'm talking about, right?

STU: There's no way I could not know that.

GLENN: Do we have that?

STU: We have that, yeah.

GLENN: Let's go ahead and play that. This is Joe Biden in his speech leading up to Barack Obama and, you know, hey, I'm going to be the vice presidential candidate and I'm all excited about it. Just listen to this.

BIDEN: Ladies and gentlemen, my wife Jill who you'll meet soon, is drop dead gorgeous.

GLENN: Stop. Is that a little uncomfortable? "Hey, I like to call her Captain Jugs. Who is that? "Who's drop dead gorgeous." I was just a little uncomfortable. But, you know, I was just like, whatever, okay. That's just, I don't know. I'm sorry. I was bothered by it. Maybe it's just me. Were you bothered by it?

STU: You know, I think it was, you know, creepy enough to listen to but to see it was worse.

GLENN: Yeah, yeah.

STU: I have to say.

GLENN: But then he goes on. Listen to this.

BIDEN: My wife Jill, who you'll meet soon, she also has her doctorate degree, which is a problem. But all kidding aside, my Jill, my Jill, my wife Jill and I are honored.

GLENN: Stop. My Jill, my Jill, my wife Jill, what does it mean? Play the beginning of that again. My wife that you'll mention, he didn't mention that he was drop dead gorgeous, she has a doctorate, which is a problem? What did that even mean? Play that. Number two again.

BIDEN: Who you'll meet soon, she also has her doctorate degree, which is a problem.

GLENN: Is that stop. Is that because is that because back in '87 he was nailed for plagiarism and also claimed a whole bunch of academic achievements that, you know, that were untrue? And then he started talking see, this is going back to the arrogance. This guy is so arrogant, he has actually been quoted as saying to somebody in a debate: I believe I have a higher IQ than you. Excuse me? You believe you have a higher IQ? What are you huh?

STU: I think that's a misquote, Glenn, I'm sorry to say. I believe he said I have a much higher IQ than you.

GLENN: I'm sorry. I'm looking down on the quote. "I have a much higher IQ" is the actual quote.

STU: He didn't just edge them out. He said much higher.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. So what does it mean with the "My wife has a doctorate, which is a problem"? I know it was supposed to be a joke, but what does it even mean? That she's smarter, that women who are really hot shouldn't have a there's usually I don't even know. Where do you go on that one? By the way, this is not going to help him with, Obama is only 2 points ahead with females over McCain. They are normally like 15 points ahead. How is that even possible? The guy is another elitist. "I've got a higher IQ than you." That's not going to I mean, this is the most elite, snobbish ticket in American history. I mean, why don't we just start running kings. Maybe it's just me. His choice of Joe Biden is interesting to me because what it's supposed to do is make up for Barack Obama's lack of experience, right? Well, he's got experience. But wait a minute. Experience, I thought you wanted somebody who wasn't going to do the typical, you know, Washington insider thing. So you get a guy who's been in Washington for 30 years. He's part of the, you know, big government, Washington kind of insider thing. But that's just a cover for Obama's lack of experience. They're calling him now this is Obama's Cheney pick. I'm sorry. I thought that was I can't do the liberal gymnastics anymore. I thought a Cheney pick was a bad idea. But no, now Cheney is okay as long as Cheney is Joe Biden.

But here's a question I have. You tell me what part of these next things do you think Obama couldn't have accomplished on his own. Which one did he need shoring up on, okay? His lack of experience. Get somebody that can you know, when I hire somebody to work with me, I usually look for people who have talents that I don't have. So it's very hard. A lot of times I just drag somebody like Stu along just because I feel sorry for him. You hire somebody that has experience where you don't have it because, you know, I'm riddled with shortcomings. I don't want to work with somebody else like me. Are you kidding me? I wouldn't be able I wouldn't be able to find my way to work in the morning. So you hire people who have different experiences.

You tell me what Joe Biden is bringing to the ticket. Do you believe that Barack Obama couldn't have accomplished these things on his own. In 2004 at the world economic forum in Davos, Joe Biden said that the U.S. does not have the moral authority to preach democracy in the Middle East because quoting we don't have much of a democracy ourselves. Remember our presidential election? Remember Florida, end quote. This is on foreign shores. Do you think Barack Obama needed help with that? I think he's perfectly capable of saying something like that on foreign shores.

In 1979 Joe Biden agreed with Carter that the fall of the Shah and the rise of the Ayatollahs was an advance for the people of Iran, that it was good for human rights in Iran, that the Shah was the problem in Iran. I think Barack Obama's got that one covered. I think he could have done that. In the 1980s Joe Biden was against Ronald Reagan's evil empire speech: Hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, why so nasty? Let's put on a happy face. He was for d’état. If we would have gone with d’état, the Soviet empire would have never collapsed. I think Barack Obama would be for d’état. In 1990 he hemmed and hawed against Kuwait about going in. He voted for Iraq until things got tough and then he was against it. Then he claimed the war was lost. Then he said Iraq should be cut into three separate states. Then he said he was against the surge and now he says the surge hasn't even worked. What part is Obama going to get from Joe Biden that he doesn't already have? He also, Joe Biden, has called for unconditional dialogue with Iran. There's no experience here that Obama needed to draw from. Obama is the most liberal guy in the Senate. Joe Biden is the third most liberal guy in the Senate. If you wanted experience, I'm sorry but Joe Biden's not the guy to give you the experience. If you wanted experience and you wanted it cut from this, why not go directly to the source. Why not just announce your running mate is Jimmy Carter? There's more I'm going to be the first to name President Jimmy Carter, a President, as my vice president. Why not? You think Jimmy Carter wouldn't have taken it? You bet he would. Might have meant another Nobel Peace Prize.

Here's the thing that I think America I think this is why John McCain is winning. There's no reason why John McCain is winning. There's no reason why he's even competitive, at least in my book. Why is he competitive? I'll tell you why. Because your gut tells you something's not right.

BLOG

CDC: Coronavirus outbreak in US is not a matter of if, but when

BLOG

Glenn Beck: Bernie Sanders and 'Bros' are more dangerous than we ever imagined

BLOG

VIDEO: Both Bernie Sanders and Barack Obama are radicals, but there's one HUGE difference

Biden backs yet another criminal justice policy with disastrous consequences

The number of people serving life sentences now exceeds the entire prison population in 1970, according to newly-released data from the Sentencing Project. The continued growth of life sentences is largely the result of "tough on crime" policies pushed by legislators in the 1990s, including presidential candidate Joe Biden.

Biden has since apologized for backing those types of policies, but it seems he has yet to learn his lesson. Indeed, Biden is backing yet another criminal justice policy with disastrous consequences—mandatory drug treatment for all drug offenders.

Proponents of this policy argue that forced drug treatment will reduce drug usage and recidivism and save lives. But the evidence simply isn't on their side. Mandatory treatment isn't just patently unethical, it's also ineffective—and dangerous.

Many well-meaning people view mandatory treatment as a positive alternative to incarceration. But there's a reason that mandatory treatment is also known as "compulsory confinement." As author Maya Schenwar asks in The Guardian, "If shepherding live human bodies off to prison to isolate and manipulate them without their permission isn't ethical, why is shipping those bodies off to compulsory rehab an acceptable alternative?" Compulsory treatment isn't an alternative to incarceration. It is incarceration.

Compulsory treatment is also arguably a breach of international human rights agreements and ethical standards. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) have made it clear that the standards of ethical treatment also apply to the treatment of drug dependence—standards that include the right to autonomy and self-determination. Indeed, according to UNODC, "people who use or are dependent on drugs do not automatically lack the capacity to consent to treatment...consent of the patient should be obtained before any treatment intervention." Forced treatment violates a person's right to be free from non-consensual medical treatment.

It's a useless endeavor, anyway, because studies have shown that it doesn't improve outcomes in reducing drug use and criminal recidivism. A review of nine studies, published in the International Journal of Drug Policy, failed to find sufficient evidence that compulsory drug treatment approaches are effective. The results didn't suggest improved outcomes in reducing drug use among drug-dependent individuals enrolled in compulsory treatment. However, some studies did suggest potential harm.

According to one study, 33% of compulsorily-treated participants were reincarcerated, compared to a mere 5% of the non-treatment sample population. Moreover, rates of post-release illicit drug use were higher among those who received compulsory treatment. Even worse, a 2016 report from the Massachusetts Department of Public Health found that people who received involuntary treatment were more than twice as likely to die of an opioid-related overdose than those with a history of only voluntary treatment.

These findings echo studies published in medical journals like Addiction and BMJ. A study in Addiction found that involuntary drug treatment was a risk factor for a non-fatal drug overdose. Similarly, a study in BMJ found that patients who successfully completed inpatient detoxification were more likely than other patients to die within a year. The high rate of overdose deaths by people previously involuntarily treated is likely because most people who are taken involuntarily aren't ready to stop using drugs, authors of the Addiction study reported. That makes sense. People who aren't ready to get clean will likely use again when they are released. For them, the only post-treatment difference will be lower tolerance, thanks to forced detoxification and abstinence. Indeed, a loss of tolerance, combined with the lack of a desire to stop using drugs, likely puts compulsorily-treated patients at a higher risk of overdose.

The UNODC agrees. In their words, compulsory treatment is "expensive, not cost-effective, and neither benefits the individual nor the community." So, then, why would we even try?

Biden is right to look for ways to combat addiction and drug crime outside of the criminal justice system. But forced drug treatment for all drug offenders is a flawed, unethical policy, with deadly consequences. If the goal is to help people and reduce harm, then there are plenty of ways to get there. Mandatory treatment isn't one of them.

Lindsay Marie is a policy analyst for the Lone Star Policy Institute, an independent think tank that promotes freedom and prosperity for all Texans. You can follow her on Twitter @LindsayMarieLP.

BOMBSHELL: 'It wasn't just Hunter,' Rudy Giuliani says Joe Biden was target of Ukraine corruption investigation — and he has the evidence to prove it

President Donald Trump's personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani joined Glenn Beck on Tuesday's radio program discuss the Senate's ongoing investigation into former vice president Joe Biden's son, Hunter Biden, and reveal new bombshell documents he's currently releasing.

Giuliani told Glenn he has evidence of "very, very serious crime at the highest levels of government," that the "corrupt media" is doing everything in their power to discredit.

He also dropped some major, previously unreported news: not only was Hunter Biden under investigation in 2016, when then-Vice President Biden "forced" the firing of Ukraine's prosecutor general Viktor Shokin, but so was the vice president himself.

"Shokin can prove he was investigating Biden and his son. And I now have the prosecutorial documents that show, all during that period of time, not only was Hunter Biden under investigation -- Joe Biden was under investigation," Giuliani explained. "It wasn't just Hunter."

Watch this clip to get a rundown of everything Giuliani has uncovered so far.

Use code GLENN to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

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.

Revealing Bernie’s dark side — one 1980s quote at a time

For most Americans, the 1980s was marked by big hair, epic lightsaber battles, and school-skipping Ferris Bueller dancing his way into the hearts of millions.

But for Bernie Sanders — who, by the way, was at that time the oldest-looking 40-year-old in human history — the 1980s was a period of important personal milestones.

Prior to his successful 1980 campaign to become mayor of Burlington, Vermont, Sanders was mostly known around the Green Mountain State as a crazy, wildly idealistic socialist. (Think Karl Marx meets Don Quixote.) But everything started to change for Sanders when he became famous—or, in the eyes of many, notorious—for being "America's socialist mayor."

As mayor, Sanders' radical ideas were finally given the attention he had always craved but couldn't manage to capture. This makes this period of his career particularly interesting to study. Unlike today, the Bernie Sanders of the 1980s wasn't concerned with winning over an entire nation — just the wave of far-left New York City exiles that flooded Vermont in the 1960s and 1970s — and he was much more willing to openly align himself with local and national socialist and communist parties.

www.youtube.com

Over the past few weeks, I have been reading news reports of Sanders recorded in the 1980s — because, you know, that's how guys like me spend their Saturday nights — and what I've found is pretty remarkable.

For starters, Sanders had (during the height of the Soviet Union) a very cozy relationship with people who openly advocated for Marxism and communism. He was an elector for the Socialist Workers Party and promoted the party's presidential candidates in 1980 and 1984.

To say the Socialist Workers Party was radical would be a tremendous understatement. It was widely known SWP was a communist organization mostly dedicated to the teachings of Marx and Leon Trotsky, one of the leaders of the Russian Revolution.

Among other radical things I've discovered in interviews Sanders conducted with the SWP's newspaper — appropriately named The Militant (seriously, you can't make this stuff up) — is a statement by Sanders published in June 1981 suggesting that some police departments "are dominated by fascists and Nazis," a comment that is just now being rediscovered for the first time in decades.

In 1980, Sanders lauded the Socialist Workers Party's "continued defense of the Cuban revolution." And later in the 1980s, Sanders reportedly endorsed a collection of speeches by the socialist Sandinistas in Nicaragua, even though there had been widespread media reports of the Sandinistas' many human rights violations prior to Sanders' endorsement, including "restrictions on free movement; torture; denial of due process; lack of freedom of thought, conscience and religion; denial of the right of association and of free labor unions."

Sanders also traveled to Nicaragua and met with socialist President Daniel Ortega. He later called the trip a "profoundly emotional experience."

Comrade Bernie's disturbing Marxist past, which is far more extensive than what can be covered in this short article, shouldn't be treated as a mere historical footnote. It clearly illustrates that Sanders' brand of "democratic socialism" is much more than a $15 minimum wage and calls for single-payer health care. It's full of Marxist philosophy, radical revolutionary thinking, anti-police rhetoric, and even support for authoritarian governments.

Millions of Americans have been tricked into thinking Sanders isn't the radical communist the historical record — and even Sanders' own words — clearly show that he is. But the deeper I have dug into Comrade Bernie's past, the more evident it has become that his thinking is much darker and more dangerous and twisted than many of his followers ever imagined.

Tomorrow night, don't miss Glenn Beck's special exposing the radicals who are running Bernie Sanders' campaign. From top to bottom, his campaign is staffed with hard-left extremists who are eager to burn down the system. The threat to our constitution is very real from Bernie's team, and it's unlike anything we've ever seen before in a U.S. election. Join Glenn on Wednesday, at 9 PM Eastern on BlazeTV's YouTube page, and on BlazeTV.com. And just in case you miss it live, the only way to catch all of Glenn's specials on-demand is by subscribing to Blaze TV.

Justin Haskins (Jhaskins@heartland.org) is editorial director of The Heartland Institute and editor-in-chief of StoppingSocialism.com.

Candace Owens blasts leftist cancel culture: 'Godless', 'societal atom bomb'

Candace Owens, BLEXIT founder and author of the upcoming book, "Blackout," joined Glenn Beck on Friday's GlennTV for an exclusive interview. available only to BlazeTV subscribers.

Candace dropped a few truth-bombs about the progressive movement and what's happening to the Democratic Party. She said people are practically running away from the left due to their incessant push to dig up dirt on anybody who disagrees with their radical ideology. She explained how -- like China and its "social credit score" -- the left is shaping America into its own nightmarish episode of "Black Mirror."

"This game of making sure that everyone is politically correct is a societal atom bomb. There are no survivors. There's no one that is perfect," Candace said. "The idea that humanity can be perfect is Godless. If you accept that there is something greater than us, then you accept that we a flawed. To be human is to be flawed."

Enjoy this clip from the full episode below:

youtu.be

BlazeTV subscribers can watch the full interview on BlazeTV.com. Use code GLENN to save $10 off one year of your subscription.