Glenn Beck: America headed for a breakup?


Glenn's hand drawn map... Click here for a larger version...

GLENN: I'm telling you this is exactly what we have been talking about on this program. "He cited the vulnerable political setup." The vulnerable political setup. "The lack of unified national laws." It's not unified laws. It's the unified enforcement of those laws. The divisions among the elite which have been clear in this crisis condition, he predicted that the U.S. will break up into six parts. Let's see, where do we want to live. "The Pacific Coast with its growing Chinese population." No, the Pacific Coast, I'd like that but not if Chinese, the Chinese population, I mean, not if it's being influenced by China. No, I can't live in California. "The south with its Hispanics." Oh, well, I didn't know you had Hispanics in the South. The South also has Disney World. I'm pulling for the South. "Texas where independence movements are on the rise." Gee, over in Russia they understand the independence movements that are happening in Texas. Have you heard that on any -- Stu, have you heard this from any other person in America, about the independence movement in Texas?

STU: No, you're an exclusive secession source. Congratulations.

GLENN: I'm just wondering how the guy overseas, over in Russia picked this up. The Atlantic coast with its distinct and separate mentality." You can have the Atlantic coast. "Five of the poorer central states with their large Native American populations and the northern states where the influence from Canada is strong. He even suggested that we could..." this is Russians speaking. "We could claim Alaska. It was only granted on lease, after all." He is a professor of the Diplomatic Academy of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. He's authored several books on information warfare.

So okay, so we have New China would be the West, we have New Canada which would be the North, we would have the center of the country would be Poor Indiantown, I think. Is that what he's -- that's basically what he was -- then you'd have Texas all by itself. Then you'd have around Texas but not all the way to New China, or all the way east to the Distinct Mentality Coast, you'd have New Hispanicville, all right? So your questions are New China -- where do you want to live? New China, New Canada, Poor Indiantown, New Hispanicville, Distinct Mentality Coast or Texas? I'm going for Texas.

STU: Is there any doubt it's Texas.

GLENN: I think I'm going for Texas. I'm going for Texas.

STU: I will say New Hispanicville is nice.

GLENN: Especially this time of year.

STU: It really is. At least I would -- he doesn't explain how Florida would be divided. So you don't know if Disney is going to be in distinct Atlantic coast area or in New Hispanicville but --

GLENN: No, it would have to be distinct mentality.

STU: The whole state?

GLENN: The whole coastline.

STU: I think Tampa would probably be doing New Hispanicville because it would be on the West Coast of Florida. So maybe like New Hispanicville --

GLENN: The West Coast is New China.

STU: No, that's the West Coast of the country. I'm talking West Coast of Florida.

GLENN: But that's the West Coast of the East Coast. So if it's the West Coast of the East Coast, it should be Distinct Mentality Coast.

STU: No, but that's the West Coast -- it's the West Coast of the peninsula. But the South is New Hispanicville.



GLENN: But it's also a coast.

STU: But they didn't say all coast had to be in the Atlantic coast. They said the Atlantic coast. That's not the Atlantic coast. That's the Gulf Coast. The Gulf Coast would clearly be in New Hispanicville.

GLENN: Does New Hispanicville then -- because you have to have the dividing line some place. Does New Hispanicville get like the Magic Kingdom and Distinct Mentality Coast get like Epcot?

STU: Yes, I think that's the way it works, divides right down the middle.

GLENN: You know that thing that they have -- oh, my gosh, we have been set up. I just realized this. This whole thing has been a setup. Have you noticed that when you go to Disney World and you go to Epcot, what do you need? A world passport. Hmmm.

STU: Hmmm.

GLENN: Interesting, isn't it?

STU: Mmm-hmmm, one currency. Just sayin'.

GLENN: It's almost like Disney who, of course, hasn't been, you know, put up in a freezer where they are just waiting to unthaw him for the new world order. It's not like he saw this coming a long, long time ago.

STU: Sounds like he's really alive pulling the strings.

GLENN: Seriously, Stu, where do you want to live? Where is the best place in America to live? I think we can rule out the Northeast.

STU: Right, but he said the Atlantic coast.

GLENN: Wait a minute. Unless --

STU: Not the whole coast.

GLENN: If you were for socialism --

STU: Yeah, we should figure out what government because I feel like you've got -- in the Atlantic coast one, that's probably a socialist government. The Pacific Coast, since it's New China, that has to be communist, right?

GLENN: Oh, yeah. That's Hollywood.

STU: Right.

GLENN: So the capital of New China will have to be Hollywood.

STU: Right.

GLENN: So it will be, you know, it will be nothing but -- it will be -- you know, remember the blacklist? It will be the opposite of that. If you are not a communist, they shut you down.

STU: So that's out there. I don't want either one of those. I figure new Canada's probably going to be like Canada Light. You know it's going to be that light sort of socialism.

GLENN: I don't have a problem with Canada.

STU: Yeah, I feel like we're going to get at least moderate socialism there. Poor Indiantown could be a great government because --

GLENN: But who's supporting Poor Indiantown?

STU: They are the poorer states according to the Russian analyst.

GLENN: I know, but Poor Indiantown, it's poor because, you know, we've crippled them with socialism.

STU: Right. So they probably wouldn't be poor anymore after this, right?

GLENN: They might be rich -- it would be nothing -- the whole center of what is now we know as the United States would be nothing but a giant casino.

STU: It would be a giant --

GLENN: It would be great. It would be a giant casino because those things, you walk inside, you never get out of them. It's like you're outside but you are not -- this could be the place that I would want to be.

STU: It would be Poor Indiantown to MGM Great Plains.

GLENN: Let's say you go from Poor Indiantown, which is the center of the -- can we put this map on? Just draw a map. Can you take a picture here? Do you have your camera? Just take a picture and send to it Chris Brady real quick. Here's my phone. Just send it to Chris Brady and we'll take a picture and you'll see --

STU: This is one of these crazy newfangled iPhones.

GLENN: Push the camera.

STU: Camera.

GLENN: There, see? And you just push and click. Here's the new -- I just drew a picture of -- yeah, there you go.

STU: One, two --

GLENN: I'm looking.

STU: Smile. Do you want to do your hair?

GLENN: No, I'm fine, I'm fine. Do I need a little product in my hair? All right, just push it. Okay, all right.

STU: Take the picture.

GLENN: Oh, jeez.

STU: One more time. Where do I click? This button?

GLENN: Just push the button.

STU: On the screen or on the button button?

GLENN: You push the button on the screen. Not the button. That turns it off.

STU: On the screen. Ready? One? Smile now.

GLENN: Just take the frickin' picture, will you? Take the picture!

STU: Okay, I got it. You look really good. Wow.

GLENN: That's disturbing.

STU: No, seriously. You would be hot enough for Indian town. You wouldn't be hot for Pacific Coastville, New China.

GLENN: Okay, so here, look. So Poor Indiantown. The problem is if you are going to Poor Indiantown, because it's basically a giant casino in the middle of the country, if you go to Distinct Mentality Coast, they will know who you are. You can never be a spy.

STU: Right, that's right. They have the best intelligence, Poor Indiantown is what you're saying.

GLENN: What?

STU: Poor Indiantown would have great intelligence.

GLENN: I'm saying you could never -- oh, yeah, they would have the camera. You would never spy in there but you could never live at Poor Indiantown and go to another place and be a spy because they would know right away.

STU: Because you would always be on camera?

GLENN: No. Because if you are from poor -- if you live in Poor Indiantown, it's a giant casino, right? You live in Poor Indiantown. You can't go to Distinct Mentality Coast.

STU: Why not?

GLENN: You'll smell like smoke.

STU: You would never --

GLENN: Everything you'd have would smell like cigarettes.

STU: Yeah, but the liberals in Distinct Mentality Coast are always the ones who are saying we need to stop people from smoking with the government but mostly because they can't stop smoking themselves.

GLENN: But that's what I mean. None of these people -- these people in Distinct Mentality Coast, these people, they would have already banned.

STU: Yeah, they would have banned it.

GLENN: So you are a spy for Poor Indiantown.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: You come over and all of a sudden you smell like cigarettes and they're like, he's from Poor Indiantown, smells like cigarettes. Whole place is a casino. And then somebody else says, "I know, it's great. I mean, hang on...... "I mean, it's really bad and I'm glad that we're here in Distinct Mentality Coast with our fearless leader.

STU: Here's the thing. Poor Indiantown is landlocked and I don't like that, okay? And so is New Canada, by the way. So you really need to go to, I feel like Texas has great -- because it's Texas and you've got the coast, you've got Texas, the mentality of Texas, not Distinct Mentality Coast. I'm saying the mentality of Texas. You've got to like that. I like that and I also like New Hispanicville. I think those are two solid choices for the incoming America.

GLENN: I like Texas and I like New Hispanicville and I like parts of Poor Indiantown, part of New Canada. I'm just not -- there's no way I'm going to be on the coast.

STU: Well, you've got a socialist and a communist government on the coast. And I don't want either of those. And then New Canada, New Canada might be nice actually. It might be very nice.

GLENN: It's cold.

STU: But it's really cold. Poor Indiantown is landlocked.

GLENN: But remember Canada also has, like, Detroit in it.

STU: That's true.

GLENN: So you've got --

STU: Fires? Keep you warm?

GLENN: You've got fires to keep you warm, you have all those empty, you know, the car plants. That's going to be -- this is happy.

STU: What? We have some new choices. What's wrong with our now pro choice?

GLENN: Pro choice, six different countries in one. This again from a Russian analyst over in the former Soviet Union talking about the new USSA that is forming here in America.

You know, if you had to choose, you know there's -- people are already choosing. They are already choosing with their feet. I'm going to take a break and I'm going to tell you there's a new survey that is out now showing about which parts of the country are the best parts of the country for the economy, which one that is lowest -- you'll never guess. You'll never, ever guess which one has the lowest amount of unemployed percentage-wise, you'll never guess which ones also, do they also have low taxes? Do they also have small government in those states? Or do they have big giant oppressive governments? You'll never guess. It's crazy. It's only crazy because there are people in America that still don't get it, and a lot of them.

Stop trying to be right and think of the children

Mario Tama/Getty Images

All the outrage this week has mainly focused on one thing: the evil Trump administration and its minions who delight in taking children from their illegal immigrant parents and throwing them all in dungeons. Separate dungeons, mind you.

That makes for a nice, easy storyline, but the reality is less convenient. Most Americans seem to agree that separating children from their parents — even if their parents entered the US illegally — is a bad thing. But what if that mom and dad you're trying to keep the kids with aren't really the kids' parents? Believe it or not, fraud happens.

RELATED: Where were Rachel Maddow's tears for immigrant children in 2014?

While there are plenty of heartbreaking stories of parents simply seeking a chance for a better life for their children in the US, there are also corrupt, abusive human traffickers who profit from the illegal immigration trade. And sorting all of this out is no easy task.

This week, the Department of Homeland Security said that since October 2017, more than 300 children have arrived at the border with adults claiming to be their parents who turned out not to be relatives. 90 of these fraud cases came from the Rio Grande Valley sector alone.

In 2017, DHS reported 46 causes of fraudulent family claims. But there have already been 191 fraud cases in 2018.

Shouldn't we be concerned about any child that is smuggled by a human trafficker?

When Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen pointed out this 315 percent increase, the New York Times was quick to give these family fraud cases "context" by noting they make up less than one percent of the total number of illegal immigrant families apprehended at the southern border. Their implication was that Nielsen was exaggerating the numbers. Even if the number of fraud cases at the border was only 0.001 percent, shouldn't we be concerned about any child that is smuggled by a human trafficker?

This is the most infuriating part of this whole conversation this week (if you can call it a "conversation") — that both sides have an angle to defend. And while everyone's busy yelling and making their case, children are being abused.

What if we just tried, for two seconds, to love having mercy more than we love having to be right all the time?

Remember when cartoons were happy things? Each panel took you on a tiny journey, carrying you to an unexplored place. In Understanding Comics, Scott McCloud writes:

The comics creator asks us to join in a silent dance of the seen and the unseen. The visible and the invisible. This dance is unique to comics. No other artform gives so much to its audience while asking so much from them as well. This is why I think it's a mistake to see comics as a mere hybrid of the graphic arts and prose fiction. What happens between . . . panels is a kind of magic only comics can create.

When that magic is manipulated or politicized, it often devolves the artform into a baseless thing. Yesterday, Occupy Wall Street published the perfect example of low-brow deviation of the artform: A six-panel approach at satire, which imitates the instructions-panel found in the netted cubbyhole behind seats on airplanes. The cartoon is a critique of the recent news about immigrant children being separated from their parents after crossing the border. It is a step-by-step guide to murdering US Immigrations and Customs Enforcement agents.

RELATED: Cultural appropriation has jumped the shark, and everyone is noticing

The first panel shows a man shoving an infant into a cage meant for Pomeranians. The following five panels feature instructions, and include pictures of a cartoonish murder.

The panels read as follows:

  1. If an ICE agent tries to take your child at the border, don't panic.
  2. Pull your child away as quickly as possibly by force.
  3. Gently tell your child to close his/her eyes and ears so they won't witness what you are about to do.
  4. Grab the ICE agent from behind and push your knife into his chest with an upward thrust, causing the agent's sternum to break.
  5. Reach into his chest and pull out his still beating heart.
  6. Hold his bloody heart out for all other agents to see, and tell them that the same fate awaits them if they f--- with your child again.

Violent comics are nothing new. But most of the time, they remain in the realms of invented worlds — in other words, not in our own, with reference to actual people, let alone federal agents.

The mainstream media made a game of crying racism with every cartoon depiction of Obama during his presidency, as well as during his tenure as Senator, when the New Yorker, of all things, faced scrutiny for depicting him in "Muslim clothing." Life was a minefield for political cartoonists during the Obama era.

Chris Hondros/Getty Images

This year, we saw the leftist outrage regarding The Simpsons character Apu — a cartoon representation of a highly-respected, though cartoonishly-depicted, character on a cartoon show composed of cartoonishly-depicted characters.

We all remember Charlie Hebdo, which, like many outlets that have used cartoon satire to criticize Islam, faced the wrath and ire of people unable to see even the tamest representation of the prophet, Muhammad.

Interesting, isn't it? Occupy Wall Street publishes a cartoon that advocates murdering federal agents, and critics are told to lighten up. Meanwhile, the merest depiction of Muhammad has resulted in riots throughout the world, murder and terror on an unprecedented scale.

The intersection of Islam and comics is complex enough to have its own three-hour show, so we'll leave it at that, for now. Although, it is worth mentioning the commentary by satirical website The Onion, which featured a highly offensive cartoon of all the major religious figures except Muhammad. It noted:

Following the publication of the image above, in which the most cherished figures from multiple religious faiths were depicted engaging in a lascivious sex act of considerable depravity, no one was murdered, beaten, or had their lives threatened.

Of course, Occupy Wall Street is free to publish any cartoon they like. Freedom of speech, and so on—although there have been several instances in which violent cartoons were ruled to have violated the "yelling fire in a crowded theater" limitation of the First Amendment.

Posting it to Twitter is another issue — this is surely in violation of Twitter's violent content policy, but something tells me nothing will come of it. It's a funny world, isn't it? A screenshot of a receipt from Chick-fil-A causes outrage but a cartoon advocating murder gets crickets.

RELATED: Twitter mob goes ballistic over Father's Day photo of Caitlyn Jenner. Who cares?

In Understanding Comics, Scott McCloud concludes that, "Today the possibilities for comics are — as they've always been — endless. Comics offers . . . range and versatility, with all the potential imagery of film and painting plus the intimacy of the written word. And all that's needed is the desire to be heard, the will to learn, and the ability to see."

Smile, and keep moving forward.

Crude and awful as the Occupy Wall Street comic is, the best thing we can do is nod and look elsewhere for the art that will open our eyes. Let the lunatics draw what they want, let them stew in their own flawed double standards. Otherwise, we're as shallow and empty as they are, and nothing good comes of that. Smile, and keep moving forward.

Things are getting better. Show the world how to hear, how to learn, how to see.

People should start listening to Nikki Haley

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP/Getty Images

Okay. Let's take a vote. You know, an objective, quantifiable count. How many resolutions has the UN Human Rights Council adopted condemning dictatorships? Easy. Well. How do you define "dictatorship"?

Well, one metric is the UN Human Rights Council Condemnation. How many have the United Nations issued to China, with a body count higher than a professional Call of Duty player?

Zero.

How about Venezuela, where socialism is devouring its own in the cruelest, most unsettling ways imaginable?

Zero.

And Russia, home of unsettling cruelty and rampant censorship, murder and (actual) homophobia?

Zero.

Iraq? Zero. Turkey? Iraq? Zero. Cuba? Zero. Pakistan? Zero.

RELATED: Nikki Haley just dropped some serious verbal bombs on Russia at the UN

According to UN Human Rights Council Condemnations, 2006-2016, none of these nations is as dangerous as we'd imagined. Or, rather, none of them faced a single condemnation. Meanwhile, one country in particular has faced unbelievable scrutiny and fury — you'll never guess which country.

No, it's not Somalia. It's Israel. With 68 UN Human Rights Council Condemnations! In fact, the number of total United Nations condemnations against Israel outnumbers the total of condemnations against all other countries combined. The only country that comes close is Syria, with 15.

The Trump administration withdrew from the United Nations Human Rights Council on Tuesday in protest of what it perceives as an entrenched bias against Israel and a willingness to allow notorious human rights abusers as members.

In an address to the UN Security Council on Tuesday, Nikki Haley said:

Let's remember that the Hamas terrorist organization has been inciting violence for years, long before the United States decided to move our embassy. This is what is endangering the people of Gaza. Make no mistake, Hamas is pleased with the results from yesterday... No country in this chamber would act with more restraint than Israel has.

Maybe people should start listening to Haley. Hopefully, they will. Not likely, but there's no crime in remaining hopeful.

Here's a question unique to our times: "Should I tell my father 'Happy Father's Day,' even though he (she?) is now one of my mothers?"

Father's Day was four days ago, yes, but this story is just weird enough to report on. One enjoyable line to read was this gem from Hollywood Gossip: "Cait is a woman and a transgender icon, but she is also and will always be the father of her six children."

RELATED: If Bruce was never a he and always a she, who won the men's Olympic gold in 1976?

Imagine reading that to someone ten — even five — years ago. And, honestly, there's something nice about it. But the strangeness of its having ever been written overpowers any emotional impact it might bring.

"So lucky to have you," wrote Kylie Jenner, in the Instagram caption under pre-transition pictures of Bruce Jenner.

Look. I risk sounding like a tabloid by mere dint of having even mentioned this story, but the important element is the cultural sway that's occurring. The original story was that a band of disgruntled Twitter users got outraged about the supposed "transphobic" remarks by Jenner's daughter.

But, what we should be saying is, "who the hell cares?" Who cares what one Jenner says to another — and more importantly and on a far deeper level — who cares what some anonymous Twitter user has to say?

When are we going to stop playing into the hands of the Twitter mob?

When are we going to stop playing into the hands of the Twitter mob? Because, at the moment, they've got it pretty good. They have a nifty relationship with the mainstream media: One or two Twitter users get outraged by any given thing — in this case Jenner and supposed transphobia. In return, the mainstream media use the Twitter comment as a source.

Then, a larger Twitter audience points to the article itself as proof that there's some kind of systemic justice at play. It's a closed-market currency, where the negative feedback loop of proof and evidence is composed of faulty accusations. Isn't it a hell of a time to be alive?