Glenn Beck: Bush speaks on economic woes


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

GLENN: I want to ask you a question. How many recessions have we gone through? How many recessions, how many troubled economic times has this country weathered? A ton, right? How many just in your lifetime? How many times have we gone through a recession? How many times have we weathered the storm? How many times have you heard the argument, "Well, it's this administration's failed policies," both the Republicans and the Democrats, over and over and over again, right? And, "Oh, stop, they're talking the economy down," blah, blah, blah. Okay, we've all lived it. Let me ask you this: How many times in your lifetime has the President of the United States given speeches at 7:30 or 7:45 or 8:30 or 8:35 in the morning directed directly to Wall Street? How many times in your lifetime have you heard the President of the United States say these words that he said today right before the markets opened?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Yesterday the house of representatives voted on a financial rescue plan that had been negotiated by congressional leaders of both parties and my administration. Unfortunately the measure was defeated by a narrow margin. I'm disappointed by the outcome, but I assure our citizens and citizens around the world that this is not the end of the legislative process. Producing legislation is complicated and it can be contentious. It matters little what a path a bill takes to become law. What matters is that we get a law. We're at a critical moment for our economy, and we need legislation that decisively addresses the troubled assets now clogging the financial system, helps lenders resume the flow of credit to consumers and businesses, and allows the American economy to get moving again.

GLENN: Okay, stop for a second. Here's what he's saying. He's saying that the financial system is clogged, and I think there's most people -- and I would love to just take phone calls today from people who are just starting to wake up and go, wait a minute, wait a minute, what does this mean. Because we and everybody on the staff here has been so into this and I've been whipping the research horses now for about a year, a year and a half on this very scenario and so we don't even know anymore what most people don't know. We don't know what the average Joe question is anymore because I was, honestly I was walking with a guy yesterday and we were walking to a car and we were talking and just last week he said to me, said, "Glenn, I just came into some money from an inheritance." And he said, "I was thinking about putting this into stocks, what stocks do you think..." and I said, you've got to be kidding me, right? He said, what? I said, well, first of all, I'm not the guy to ask for investment advice and the second thing is, are you paying attention to what's going on? Now, this is not a guy that's associated with us at all. He said, I know there's some stuff going on but, you know, it's all over, right? I said, all over? It's just beginning. He said, really?


Saw him yesterday and he said, so the stock market was down 777 points. So now should I put my money in the stock market? I said, no, no, don't put your money in the stock market. It's extraordinarily volatile. And he said, well, some people say it's going to go back up tomorrow. I said, it will go up one day and go down the next day and up one day and down the next day. I said, you can't trust it yet. He said, I don't even know what all of this means. And I think that's where most people are. They don't even know what this means. And that's what the President is in between a rock and a hard place here. Some of it by his own doing. He can't really explain what all of this means. What he just said here is there are people that can't get loans.

Now, a lot of people will say, well, I can go get a loan, or, I've got good credit, I don't have to worry about that, I'm not doing -- let me tell you something. Let me tell you something. The credit that he's talking about is the kind of credit that businesses use and you as well. School loans, everything. You as well. What's happened is -- remember you don't want a run on the bank. Why? You don't want a run on the bank because then everybody takes their money and they hoard it and they put it underneath their mattress and there's no money left to be able to loan money. Remember It's a Wonderful Life: Your money's in this guy's house, your money's over here. So you don't want to hoard money. Well, there was a run on the bank. See, we have the trust of FDIC, so we don't run and get our money because we know that our money is going to be returned to us. Because the federal government will just print more money if they don't have it. They will just print it. So you get your money back. So we have that little seal on the door that makes us feel all happy.


Well, the banks don't have that. The banks know what's going on, and the banks don't trust each other. They don't know, "Wait a minute, are you good, are you bad? Are you going to survive, are you not?" They don't know what's going to happen next. They don't know if the Government's going to get involved, not get involved, seize them, do this, do that. Is the economy going to grow or expand or contract, are we having huge taxes coming, are we having huge spending still? What's going to happen with the hedge funds, what's going to happen with the price of oil? They have no idea. And so what they've done is they've gone to their bank, the treasury and the Fed and they have had a run on the bank and they have put that money under their proverbial mattress. So they are saying, no, no, no, I can't loan you any money. They have got all the money they need but they are holding onto it because they don't know, they may have to cover some assets, they don't know what's coming. So they just don't spend their money. Well, that's what happened in the Great Depression with regular people. That's what happened with Japan with regular people. They had money and they wouldn't spend it. And so what happens, everything stops.

Now if you're -- and you know this. If you're a farmer, you need to go and get a loan, "I need to get a loan, got to buy my fertilizer, got to buy my seeds, start all my wages, everything else." So you go get a loan until that crop is harvest and then you pay it back. Grocery stores have to do that, get the trucks, get it all out. Nobody has the money to just put out. They have these revolving lines of credit. Well, that revolving line of credit has stopped now. So there's no way to do business.

This is something that we talked to you about eight months ago and I said if this stops, if people can't get loans, business will stop. They say that we're probably around two weeks away from just business, I mean healthy businesses just not being able to do business because if -- and I don't have any information. I don't even want to use real names. You know, if Bill's Fabric Store has lots of fabric and they are trying to sell fabric to, you know, a name brand maker, well, that name brand maker can't buy it because they always take out a giant loan because they don't have money for, you know, the plaid skirts on hand. That's what they do. That business, even healthy ones, will go down because nobody can get the short-term loans.


That's what the President is talking about. This is why it affects you because businesses will begin to close. Healthy businesses will begin to close. You'll -- unless they operate on a full cash basis, they won't be able to do it. Unless they are self-sufficient and have zero debt, unless -- it doesn't matter how good your credit is. You ain't getting a loan. So unless your business has the money where they never have a revolving line of credit, they never have to go to the bank, they are not going to be able to survive. That's why he says really big things going on, but he never really explains that in this. That's why you have to go back and say, "Okay, wait a minute, what else did he say?"

PRESIDENT BUSH: I recognize this is a difficult vote for members of congress. Many of them don't like the fact that our economy has reached this point, and I understand that.

GLENN: Stop. He doesn't like -- many of them don't like that our economy has reached this point. Most Americans at this point go, you're damn right, and whose fault is it? Instead of saying "What point," the immediate thing from every American is, "You're damn right, and I'm one of them. I don't like, and you guys caused it." Instead of saying, "Well, what point exactly are we at, what exactly are we facing? What do you mean by they don't like the fact that we're at this point?"

PRESIDENT BUSH: But the reality is that we're in an urgent situation.

GLENN: Stop. We're in an urgent situation. Why are we in an urgent situation? What is an urgent situation? I've lived through recessions before. I don't remember ever hearing that they were so urged.

PRESIDENT BUSH: And the consequences will grow worse each day if we do not act.

GLENN: Stop. If the government doesn't give $750 billion as a bailout -- that is twice the size of prescription drugs, twice the size of prescription drugs -- if they don't implement this plan now, the problems grow worse by the day?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Dramatic drop in the stock market we saw yesterday will have a direct impact on the retirement accounts, pension funds and personal savings of millions of our citizens. And if our nation continues on this course, the economic damage will be painful and lasting.

GLENN: Stop. The economic damage will be painful and lasting. Why? Why is this different than any other, why is this different than any other recession? Okay, so you get the bad banks, the bad banks go out. Okay, big deal. We had the S&L, we had the 1987 S&L scandal. We lived through that. It wasn't painful and lasting. You know, we got through it. What's the big deal here?

PRESIDENT BUSH: I know many Americans are especially worried about the cost of the legislation. The bill the House considered yesterday commits up to $700 billion taxpayer dollars to purchase troubled assets from banks and other financial institutions. That, no question, is a large amount of money.

GLENN: Twice the size of prescription drugs.

PRESIDENT BUSH: This is a large problem.

GLENN: Stop. Twice the size of prescription drugs, and I know that's a lot of money. Do you remember what it took to get the prescription drug thing through? And I know that's a lot of money. Yeah, it's a ton of money. Even with a large problem, he says. Again most Americans blow that off because they've heard this before. We've heard this over and over again. You want to talk about the little boy that cried wolf, this is it. This is what the average American thinks. "Really?" You know what? This problem where the President says something like this and no one listens to him starts a long time ago. It starts really, I think the seed was during the Nixon administration, when you -- what? Are you kidding me? When everybody said in the 1990s, "Oh, it doesn't matter what he does in his personal life. It doesn't matter. So what. He was lying about sex." It does matter! You're right, it doesn't matter that it was about sex. It could have been about anything. It doesn't matter about the topic. It matters about the lie. You can't lie to people. You can't look at people in the eye and say, "Yeah, well, okay, I was lying about that one." Because now you don't trust. Now you've seen a guy put every ounce of credibility onto the table. So half the country was disenfranchised in the Nineties and said, wait a minute, it does matter. You can't lie. And then we had the 2000 election where they were clearly lying about the recount. And then they stole the next election and then we went into Iraq, and did they have yellow cake, did they not have yellow cake. Was he lying about that, was he not lying about that. No one believes our candidates anymore. No one believes our President anymore. No one believes our congress anymore. Nobody believes this problem is real because no one has any credibility.

Tapping the brakes on transgenderism in 2023

Hunter Martin / Contributor | Getty Images

2022 was the year of the emperor’s new clothes—where we were supposed to pretend that someone like Lia Thomas is a woman, legitimately beating actual women in swimming competitions. This carpet-bombing of common sense won’t be letting up anytime soon. Just before the New Year, the World Boxing Council announced that it’s going to create a separate category for transgender boxers. The WBC president said:

we are doing this because of safety and inclusion. We have been the leaders in rules for women’s boxing—so the dangers of a man fighting a woman will never happen because of what we are going to put in place.

After all the insanity you’ve been told to accept about transgender athletes in recent years, his statement is remarkable. He’s admitting what common sense people have been saying all along—that trans athletes identifying as women still carry natural physical advantages (from the fact that they’re actually male), and that those natural advantages could endanger biological women.

Trans athletes identifying as women still carry natural physical advantages.

The WBC president went on to say:

In boxing, a man fighting a woman must never be accepted regardless of gender change. There should be no gray area around this, and we want to go into it with transparency and the correct decisions. Woman to man or man to woman transgender change will never be allowed to fight a different gender by birth.

Maybe the WBC is on to something here. Maybe the only way to solve the stupidity of letting biological males play female sports is to create a separate transgender category in every sport. That would make competition fair again. However, the trans agenda will never accept this because it doesn’t validate their transition—in fact, it admits that these are not authentically female athletes.

There is some rare, good news on this front. In late December, the Eleventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals voted to uphold a Florida school-board policy that requires transgender students to use the bathroom of their biological sex. Of course, the Left won’t accept this, so this case will probably go to the Supreme Court sooner than later. You’re supposed to always believe the science, except when it comes to your own body parts.

You’re supposed to always believe the science, except when it comes to your own body parts.

And by the way, if the Left truly cared about unbiased science as it pertains to transgenderism, they’d listen to their favorite European country, Sweden. Sweden’s national board of health recently updated its guidelines on treating children with gender dysphoria. Unlike the Biden administration and the U.S. medical establishment right now, Sweden’s new emphasis is caution:

the scientific data is INSUFFICIENT to assess the effects of puberty-inhibiting and gender-sensitive hormone therapy of children and young people.

The Swedish guidelines also mention the prevalence of de-transition cases as another reason for tapping the brakes on sex-change surgeries for children.

Common sense apparently does still exist, even in places like Sweden. If only America would listen.

Glenn wants to dive deep into different philosophical topics this year. As CRT and woke curricula are demonizing the "western tradition," it is vitally important that we preserve the tradition that gave birth our nation and gives context to the culture we live in today. Here are the top 11 books to give you a crash course in the western philosophic tradition. If you don't have the time to read them, you can find an overview to each of the books below!

1. Plato's Republic

The first titan of Greek philosophy, Plato articulated the set of questions that would drive the future western philosophical tradition. The pre-eminent question among Greek philosophers was "what is the thing that explains everything." In philosophical lingo, this question is framed as "what is the logos or the good." Plato argued that reality could be explained in terms of the "forms." For example, when you see multiple examples of a "courageous" act, then, Plato would argue, there is such a thing as "courage." The form of "the good" is the form that gives meaning to all of reality. Humans use their rational minds to contemplate what is good and then align their desires to "the good" in order to pursue it.

2. Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics

The second titan of Greek philosophy was none other than Aristotle, who was a student of Plato. Aristotle deviated from his teacher's claims about "forms" and instead argued that every single thing has a purpose, a telos. For example, the telos of a chair is to provide a place for someone to sit. In the same way that a chair's purpose is to provide a place for someone to sit, Aristotle argues that the telos of human beings is to pursue happiness.

In the first page of the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle claims that every action is done for the sake of pursuing happiness, although, all too often, our actions are misplaced. We often pursue things we believe will make us happy when, in reality, they are fleeting, momentary pleasures that result in despair, heartbreak, or pain. Rather than conforming the world around us to fit our momentary desires, Aristotle argues that we achieve happiness by understanding the nature of the world around us and how we fit into it by actively cultivating virtues in order to make our soul "fit to be happy." Work and action, therefore, are not mere moral "to-do lists," but rather bring us fulfillment.

3. Augustine's City of God

If Plato is the first titan of ancient philosophy, then Augustine is the first titan of medieval philosophy. Medieval philosophy begins with the re-discovery of ancient philosophical texts that had been lost throughout the Roman Empire. As Christianity had taken root and spread across the western world, medieval philosophy integrated these newly-discovered texts into Christian theology. Augustine is the pre-eminent medieval Neo-platonic philosopher, incorporating Plato's philosophy into Christian theology.

Augustine claimed that God himself is the ultimate "form" or "the good" from which all of reality derives its meaning and existence. A thing is "good" insofar as it coalesces with the way God intended it to be. When a thing stays away from God's intention, it is "not good." From this, we get the Augustinian definition of "evil" as a "privation" or "absence of goodness," which ultimately corresponds to God's nature and character.

4. Aquinas' Summa Theologica

Just as Augustine incorporated Plato's philosophy into Christian theology, the second medieval titan, Thomas Aquinas, incorporated Aristotelian philosophy into Christian theology. Building from Aristotle, Aquinas argues that Christ is our happiness, the longing of every human heart and the object of every human action. Though we may think we are pursuing happiness outside of Christ, our this pursuit is misplaced and will result in fleeting pleasure and pain. True happiness and fulfillment, Aquinas argues, is found in Christ himself and the pursuit of his nature.

**Note: Aquinas' Summa is one of the largest works ever written and contains arguments about many different subjects--there are concise versions that will save you a lot of time!

5. Francis Bacon's Novem Organum

If medieval philosophy is defined by the incorporation of ancient philosophy into orthodox Christian theology, then the Enlightenment is defined as the rejection of both. English philosopher Francis Bacon kicked off the Enlightenment with a total rejection of the Aristotelian view of reality. The title of his book, the Novum Organum, or "the new order," is a deliberate tease of Aristotle's Organon, or "the order of things." Bacon's "new order" purports that, contrary to Aristotle, there is no inherent "nature" or "purpose" in reality. Rather, reality is something that we can conquer by means of knowledge and force, dissecting nature to its fundamental parts and reconstructing it into what we want. Bacon is considered the father of the scientific method, creating a testable means through which we can understand, break down and re-construct nature.

6. Descartes' Discourse on Method

Descartes is best known for his famous assertion, cogito ergo sum, or "I think, therefore, I am." In Discourse on Method, Descartes embarks on a rigorous endeavor to doubt anything that can be doubted. He postulates that all of reality can be doubted; however, the one thing that cannot be doubted, he concludes, is that there must be someonewho is doubting. Though we may think that we are in the matrix, we are thinking, therefore, we must exist.

Descartes's rigorous skepticism introduced a brand-new burden of truth. In order for something to be true, it must be beyond all reasonable doubt. Many continue to use Descartes' skepticism as a way to challenge religious belief. According to these modern-day skeptics, unless you can prove that God exists beyond any reasonable doubt, there is no way to actually know whether he exists. The severing of knowledge and faith is often attributed to Descartes.

7. David Hume's Treatise on Human Nature

Scottish philosopher David Hume took aim at both Plato and Aristotle. One of his most famous and consequential claims about human nature is, "reason is and always ought to be slave of the passions." This took direct aim at Plato's view of human nature. Plato argued that our reason or "rationality" should always rule our passions so that we will desire what is good. Hume flips this on its head, claiming that our reason is helplessly enslaved to our passions and will inevitably justify what we will already want. From this, Hume introduced a new articulation of moral relativism, claiming that humans are not able to choose between what is good and what is evil, but rather will choose what they want over what they don't.

8. Kant's Contemplation on the Metaphysics of Morals

Hume's moral relativism sparked panic within German philosopher Immanuel Kant. If we will inevitably do what we desire, how can we ever choose to do something good and moral for its own sake? We must, according to Kant, separate morality completely from the passions if it's to be saved. Kant, therefore, argues that duty is the highest good that man can aspire to. We do the right thing, not because we want to--on the contrary, we do the "right thing" because it's our duty to do so, especially when we don't want to. This breaks away from the Aristotelian notion that our happiness is inextricably intertwined with the pursuit of "the good."

9. Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil

Nietzsche wasn't convinced by either Hume or Kant's efforts to retain some semblance of civility or relativistic moral standard. According to Nietzsche, if there is no such thing as transcendent morality, then "moral maxims" are reduced to meaningless words purported by the people in power. Morality, therefore, becomes a game of persuasion at best, coercion and force at worst. People are reduced to winners and losers, opressors and victims, and whoever comes out on top gets to impose their desired view of the world on the losers. Therefore, the goal of the individual is to cultivate the "will to power," to become the powerful "ubermensch" or "superhuman," or else you will be reduced to a victim susceptible to other people's coercion and oppression.

10. C.S. Lewis's The Abolition of Man

After the Enlightenment ends in a grand, destructive finale with Nietzsche, Christian philosophers in the 20th century attempt to pick up the pieces and resurrect the ancient and medieval philosophies that had been cast to the side. In The Abolition of Man, C.S. Lewis famously laments that mankind has become "men without chests." This is a direct reference to Plato's view of human nature--there is nothing linking our mind to our heart. Intellectually, we have dissected all of reality into its individual bits, stripping it of its holistic beauty, while also succumbing to our whims and passions with no notion of a transcendent moral law. Lewis calls for the re-marriage of our minds and our hearts, so that we will not only pursue what is good, but moreover, we will desire to do so.

11. Alasdair McIntyre's After Virtue

The latter part of the 20th century saw the resurgence of Aristotelian ethics after being largely dismissed over the past 400 years during the Enlightenment. Scottish Catholic philosopher Alasdair McIntyre was and continues to be one of the foremost leaders of this movement. In his magnum opus, After Virtue, McIntyre takes aim at the entire Enlightenment project itself and shows how it ultimately fails by its own standards. If reality is a mere power dynamic, as Nietzsche argues, and if morality is an act of persuasion and passion, as Hume purports, then we have no reason to take their views seriously. If all of reality is relative, then the statement "reality is relative" is itself relative. It becomes victim of the self-refutation of its own standards. Transcendent morality, he argues, must exist, because there must be some standard by which we judge reality and can say with determination, "this is good" and "this is evil."

The Biden Admin EXPANDED abortion access because they DON'T believe in the Constitution

Joshua Lott / Stringer, JOSEPH PREZIOSO / Contributor | Getty Images

This month has already produced an extreme example of why we need a functional and more conservative Congress in order for America to have a chance at moving forward—because the Left does not believe in the Constitution.

Sure, if you confronted a Democrat in Congress, they would probably claim some sort of allegiance to the Constitution—but as a practical matter, they do not believe in it.

Instead, the Left has put all of their eggs in the basket of the executive branch. Why? Because it has the furthest reach through all the various departments, and it can move the fastest—in short, because it’s the most dictatorial. It only takes a department head to write a new memo, or even better, the President to sign a new executive order to carry the force of law.

The Left has put all of their eggs in the basket of the executive branch.

Do you recall any of the Left’s favorite Supreme Court decisions over the years—something like gay marriage for example—and how Republicans immediately tried to subvert it, using the executive branch to try to nullify the decision? Yeah, that never happened. But that is exactly what Democrats have done in recent weeks to expand abortion access.

Democrats only consider the Supreme Court legitimate when they approve of the decisions. When the miraculous overturning of Roe v. Wade happened last summer, President Biden called it “a realization of an extreme ideology and a tragic error by the Supreme Court.”

Democrats only consider the Supreme Court legitimate when they approve of the decisions.

Recently the FDA approved local pharmacies to issue abortion pills. For the first 20 years after these pills were developed, they were not treated like typical prescription drugs. They had to be dispensed in-person by a doctor. That in-person requirement is now gone.

Keep in mind that the Left’s go-to line is that abortion is always about the health and safety of women, yet a 2021 peer-reviewed study found that chemical abortions have a complication rate four times greater than surgical abortions. Between 2002 and 2015, the rate of abortion-related ER visits following use of the abortion pills increased by 507 percent.

Chemical abortions have a complication rate four times greater than surgical abortions.

And now the Biden administration is making these less-safe abortions much more accessible. Thanks to the FDA’s rule change, Walgreens and CVS have already agreed to dispense abortion pills in states where abortion is legal—effectively turning these stores into new abortion clinics.

As for states that have abortion bans, "Team Biden" announced a new way around those too. Three weeks ago, the Justice Department issued a legal opinion that the U.S. Postal Service is allowed to deliver abortion pills anywhere, even in places where abortion is illegal. What’s their rationale? That the sender cannot know for sure whether the recipient will use the pills illegally or not. So it’s totally okay.

The U.S. Postal Service is allowed to deliver abortion pills anywhere, even in places where abortion is illegal.

Georgetown Law professor Lawrence Gostin told the Washington Post that this Justice Department opinion is “a major expansion of abortion access in the United States.”

So, to recap—the Biden administration has used the FDA, the Justice Department, and the Post Office, which all fall under the executive branch, to provide an end-run around the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson decision.

Expanding abortion was easy—simple policy tweaks and declarations that carry the force of law without an ounce of input from actual lawmakers in Congress—all because it comes from the grotesque, bloated, apparently pro-death executive branch.

Glenn is one of the most outspoken critics of the World Economic Forum and their vision to use crises to reconstruct the world order known as The Great Reset. The recent WEF summit in Davos confirms what Glenn has long warned about: globalist elites seek to upend our democracy, freedoms, and way of life to achieve their utopian climate goals. Here are 15 quotes from the 2023 Davos Summit, revealing their true intentions in their own words:

1. Saving the planet

When you hear the word, "Davos," the first thought that should pop into your mind is an elite group getting together to save the world from imminent climate disaster... at least they think of themselves that way. According to John Kerry:

I mean, it's so almost extraterrestrial to think about saving the planet.

2. Private jets

What most people think when they hear the word "Davos" is a group of global elites flying in on private jets to talk about climate change... and yes, John Kerry does own a private jet, no matter how many times he denies it:

I fly commercial [...] Exclusively.

3. Global Collaboration Village

You always hear some weird, dystopian projects coming out of WEF, like "The Global Collaboration Village," a new metaverse community aimed at strengthening "global cooperation." It sounds like the next installment of Brave New World. According to Klaus Schwab, Founder and President of the WEF:

The Global Collaboration Village is the pioneering effort to use the metaverse for public good, to create global cooperation and to strengthen global cooperation in the metaverse or using metaverse technologies. For me, it's a dream coming true because the village allows the Forum to create a more larger and open platform where everybody can participate.

4. Climate revolution

However, the core theme throughout WEF summits is the immediate need for a climate revolution and how businesses are selfishly blocking the revolution because they want to make an extra buck. Here's how John Kerry summed up the sentiment:

How do we get there? The lesson I have learned in the last years [...] is money, money, money, money, money, money, money.

5. Do or die

This often turns into alarmist language, like having to choose between wealth and our planet's survival... Joyeeta Gupta, Professor of Environment and Development in the Global South at University of Amsterdam, said it eloquently:

If we do the minimum at this pivotable moment in our history, then we and our children – even if we are rich – will live in the danger zone. But if we – business people, governments, citizens, cities – take action today, then we and our children will have a future worth looking forward to.

6. Colossal risks

Potsdam Institute's director Johan Rockström, used similar language, claiming we are "taking colossal risks with the future of civilization":

We are taking colossal risks with the future of civilization on Earth, we are degrading the life support systems that we all depend on, we are actually pushing the entire Earth system to a point of destabilization, pushing Earth outside of the state that has supported civilization since we left the last Ice Age 10,000 years ago.

7. Rain bombs

"Colossal risks" like... rain bombs? We didn't make that up. Ask Al Gore:

That’s what’s boiling the oceans, creating these atmospheric rivers, and the rain bombs.

Courtesy of the World Economic Forum

8. Survival comes down to this

How do we secure our survival? According to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, we have to "end our addiction to fossil fuels." This entails wiping out our entire energy industry, displacing millions of workers, and relying on global governments to usher in a new green industry. In his words:

So, we need to act together to close the emissions gap, and that means to phase out progressively coal and supercharge the renewable revolution, to end the addiction to fossil fuels, and to stop our self-defeating war on nature.

9. Complete transformation

It isn't hyperbolic to argue that the globalist climate goals will completely transform the world economy. Even EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen admitted:

The net-zero transformation is already causing huge industrial, economic and geopolitical shifts – by far the quickest and the most pronounced in our lifetime. It is changing the nature of work and the shape of our industry.

10. Scientific necessity

Of course, to bring about this "net-zero" transformation, we will have to override small, "political expediencies" like democracy to do what is "scientifically necessary." According to Zurich Insurance Group’s head of sustainability risk John Scott:

We’re living in a world right now where what’s scientifically necessary, and what is politically expedient don’t match.

11. Illegal hate speech

Doing away with "political expediencies" would also require the censorship of dissent, which would likely manifest in hate-speech laws. When asked by Brian Stelter how the discussion of disinformation relates to everything else happening today in Davos, European Commission VP Věra Jourová shared this prediction:

Illegal hate speech, which you will have soon also in the U.S. I think that we have a strong reason why we have this in the criminal law.

12. Climate first

We will also have to forego national interests on the international stage. America won't be able to advocate for policies and interests that benefit Americans. Instead, we will sacrifice national interests for the sake of global climate interests. French economy minister Bruno Le Maire said:

The key question is not China First, US First, Europe First. The key question for all of us is Climate First.

13. The role of war

We can also expect globalist leaders to use crises, like the war in Ukraine, to expedite the "net-zero transformation." Chancellor of Germany Olaf Scholz said:

Ultimately, our goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 has been given an additional boost by Putin’s war. Now we have even more cause to move away from fossil fuels.

14. Blame game

Globalist leaders will continue to blame ALL of the crises in our society on climate change to justify the "net-zero transition," from the energy shortage to "mistrust, selfishness [and] xenophobia." Prime Minister of Spain Pedro Sanchez said:

Our present struggle is not only against Putin or the energy shortage. It is also against fear, mistrust, selfishness, xenophobia, and environmental disaster. And its outcome will define life in the West and beyond for decades to come.

15. Sacrifice for the greater good

While we sacrifice our national interests for the sake of the "greater global good," we can expect our foreign enemies, like China, to benefit. Suisse Chairman Axel Lehmann said:

The growth forecasts now for China is 4.5%. I would not personally be surprised when that would be topped.

Conclusion

Glenn has been clear about the distinction between wanting to transition to green practices on your own accord and being forced into that transition by globalist, unelected elites. Leaders at Davos will continue to use alarmist language to justify their crackdown on democracy and freedom to bring about their leftist utopia. We have to cut through the alarmist language and in order to protect our freedoms.