Romney: Obama 'Reads the Teleprompter Well'

GLENN: All right. So Barack Obama now says he's going to bankrupt the coal industry. His campaign immediately -- I mean, we have the audio of him saying it. The campaign says no, no, no, that's crazy, that's just, that's a phantom argument. That's what he said! In fact, he said his policies will make electricity costs skyrocket. That's what he said. But he's doing it for global warming. But now it's just, you pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. Well, if you look at all the policies and where this economy is headed in the first place, what happens if Barack Obama becomes President of the United States? We welcome back to the program Governor Mitt Romney. How are you, Mitt?

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: I'm terrific, thank you.

GLENN: Good. Boy, we have just -- I mean, it is amazing to me all the things the media has just dropped the ball on. Now we find out over the weekend that Barack Obama is going to put the coal industry out of business.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: You know, it's not just the coal industry. If you put the coal industry out of business, it, of course, represents about 80% of the electric power we create. How are we going to get the electricity necessary to power these electric cars we're so excited about. And how is our economy going to run if we're not using the resource we have in this country. We've got to have clean coal. We've got to have nuclear, we've got to have offshore drilling and Barack Obama is toeing the line of the extreme left wing environmentalists that will frankly close our economy and make it impossible for America to compete. It's a job-killing program.

GLENN: As a businessman, Mitt, you look at the policies of Barack Obama and you look at those policies. Murdock today came out and said between the coal and the unions and everything else, this is just, his policies are going to destroy the economy.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: You know, he is out there selling the message of change and everybody wants to get better. So change sounds good. But the problem is in all of my political career and in my business life I've looked at a lot of policies. I've never seen a combination of policies so designed to slow an economy and kill jobs as those that Barack Obama's put forward.

GLENN: So then why would somebody like Warren Buffett, because he keeps playing the Warren Buffett card. Warren Buffett's on my side, Voelker is on my side.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Well, Warren Buffett is a guy who has enough money to buy the entire planet and Warren Buffett has a lot of friends among the Hollywood folks and I'm sure Warren Buffett is genuine in his support but, you know, I'd love to sit down with Warren Buffett. My guess is I'd be able to convince Warren Buffett. I don't think he's given any thought whatsoever. My guess is Warren Buffett has never even heard of this card check bill that basically says they are going to impose unions through intimidation on small businesses across this country. You are going to kill the engine of new job growth in this country with that proposal and it hasn't even been talked about in this presidential campaign. So some of us who do know what Barack Obama's up to are convinced that, for instance, his position on coal, we just heard about that last night for the first time. I don't think Warren Buffett has heard the whole picture.

GLENN: When you talk about the union thing, I've been looking back historically speaking. In 1937 the Supreme Court allowed the unions to really have a monopoly in businesses and we went into a depression within a depression. This is being compared to that kind of a move, that this will really impact business. Can you explain to the average person that this is not hype, this is something real?

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Well, I actually think this union effort, this card check effort, and basically what it is is that every business in America right now, if the union wants to unionize your business, one of the voters -- or it should be the workers get a chance to vote and to have a secret ballot. The Democrats and Barack Obama want to take away the secret ballot so that people don't get a chance to vote on this. Instead they can go house to house and intimidate people and make them sign a card and if they get half the workers to sign a card, automatically are unionized. Well, now a small business with let's say 20 people, they have now got the Teamsters in there telling them how they have to run their business and they are in a setting where they have got to get labor lawyers telling them what things they can do and they can't do. This will have the most massive impact on America's competitiveness on anything that's happened the last 50 years, and I'm very troubled by it, and it hasn't even been spoken about in his presidential campaign because it's hard to explain.

GLENN: Well, why do you suppose the media is so in bed with Barack Obama to levels that we have never, ever seen before?

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Well, you know, I frankly think that a lot of the media, of course, have their own feelings and their own -- I mean, it's a bias, of course. Some are biased positive, some biased negative. Some Republican, some Democrat. People have a right to express their own view. That's the nature of a free press but, you know, you've got a lot of liberals in the media and so they love Barack Obama. They love what he talks about. But I don't think they have any experience whatsoever, that is I'm talking about liberals in the media, any experience in the job world, in creating jobs. A lot of them, by the way, are seeing their jobs go away and they hope Barack Obama will, you know, change the law. So, you know, you can't take away their jobs.

GLENN: There's a piece of video now on the Drudge Report from Congressman Nadler and he is talking about how Barack Obama did not have the political courage -- now, this is a supporter of Obama.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Yeah.

GLENN: He didn't have the political courage to leave his church. I mean, I haven't seen any political courage. When our back is up against a wall, you know, internationally speaking with Iran, with Russia, with Venezuela, with these countries that become more and more dangerous the more oil collapses, isn't political courage something that we should see demonstrated in our President before we need it on a global scale?

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: You know, it's one of the things that's most troubling to me is that the Democratic party has selected a nominee who has not been tested. He's an intelligent guy. That you can tell. He speaks well. He reads the TelePrompTer well. But he has not been tested under fire. He's not been tested as a leader. He's not been tested to see if he can work across the aisle. And frankly, you know, he may do just fine if he's elected or he may be a disaster, but we just don't know and that's why in the world that I'm used to, you hire people, you select people based upon the things they've accomplished, not just what they say they are going to accomplish. And it is very frightening to a lot of people that you'd elect as the nominee of the Democratic party somebody who has not yet had the opportunity to actually lead.

GLENN: You know, the problem for a lot of people, Mitt, is they look at this candidate for the Republicans, John McCain, and they say, "Well, okay, he's much better than Barack Obama but I'm still -- but he's still for a massive cap and trade." I mean, you've got Barack Obama. He's going to cripple coal, and John McCain's isn't that bad but it's still a cap and trade program. So they look at it and say, okay, what is the difference here? And I know there are, but, you know, how would you address the cap and trade on the day where everybody's paying attention to coal?

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Well, as you know, there were a number of places in the primary campaign where I disagree with John McCain and his cap and trade proposal is one of them. You know, I would hope to be able to convince him that before you put in place a cap and trade program on the U.S. that there must be participation by countries like China. It does not make sense to me to have any form of unilateral disarmament if you want to negotiate with somebody and you feel it's important to bring down global CO2 emissions, then China has to be part of the picture. And if we go out there and put a burden on our own industry and they don't put a burden on theirs, you'll just kill jobs here. So it's a place where, you know, I would endeavor to convince my own candidate that we can do a better job.

GLENN: There was a story today, and I haven't had a chance to fully read it yet. It was talking about the protectionist policies of the Democrats coming in and how that they are just, they are going to be emboldened and start to enact some of the protectionist policies that they have been chomping at the bit for for the last few years and been really talking about. And quite honestly, Mitt, you know, I haven't read the story in its total yet and I know when I read protectionist policies again, I go back to the Great Depression and say that's one of the big problems that we had. What are the policies that you're seeing coming from this Democratic congress that they are chomping at the bit for that worry you?

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Well, the biggest, of course, is this card check. That worries me enormously. But then you hit on the second one. Protectionism sounds wonderful, which is the idea that we're going to protect our companies, our industry from foreign competition. But the other side of protectionism is that the people we trade with are not entirely stupid. If we say we're not going to let their goods and services in, they won't let our goods and services in. It works both ways. And one out of six jobs in this country is associated with sending goods and services to other countries. Export, in other words. And so you start talking protectionism, we're going to have an enormous job loss on the part of entrepreneurial businesses. Now, yeah, maybe some of the steel companies and auto companies would feel better for a while but not for very long because you put protectionist barriers up, it's going to hurt us and it's going to hurt everybody else.

GLENN: This is probably the last time that I'll get to speak to you for a while and the election is tomorrow. What is the one thing that you feel if people would just hear, they would understand the importance of this election and their vote and which one to vote for.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Well, the country's going to take a new direction as of Wednesday morning and if we elect Barack Obama, we're going to take a sharp left turn following Europe. And just look at the experience of Europe over the last 30 years. No job growth, high unemployment, anemic overall economic growth. It is the wrong course for America. And a protectionist, government-managed economy is not a successful economy. The American path is the far superior way to go. We're going through a crisis right now. The prime mortgage business which is nutty that it has this big impact that it does but my goodness, let's not walk down the path of Europe. Things there are a lot worse than they are here.

GLENN: All right. Mitt, thank you very much. We'll talk to you again, governor.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Thanks, Glenn. Good to be with you.

GLENN: You bet. Bye-bye.

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.