Glenn Beck: How small is $100 million?



Related Video

GLENN: Barack Obama, yesterday he comes out, he is demanding $100 million in cuts. Whoa, look at this tough guy coming out swinging. And they better find it in the next 90 days. We had to sign trillions of dollars worth of stuff and we had to have it done by Friday. They've got 90 days to find $100 million? I got news for you. You ready? Department of Homeland Security, just over $50 million, they just decided to buy their office supplies differently, not to cut back. Just to buy them differently, and the Department of Homeland Security has they've saved over $50 million. Hmmm, they are halfway there. That's fantastic. They have got another 90 days to figure you got 89 days to figure out the rest of it, gang. $100 million. That's, of course, a lot of money. That's what my daughter said to me last night: Dad, $100 million is a lot to me. Yeah, yeah, me, too. $100 million, that's a lot. It might even be a lot to Warren Buffett. Not as much to Warren Buffett as it is to me.

Press secretary Robert Gibbs tried to downplay the fact that $100 million is only a tiny portion. .0029% of the budget. None of the deficit. Of the budget. Gibbs said this play this audio, please. This is press secretary Robert Gibbs yesterday.

VOICE: Why not target a bigger number?

GIBBS: Well, I think only in Washington D.C. does $100 million

VOICE: This is not a joke. The deficit's giant. $100 million really is only

GIBBS: No joke? I'm not making a joke about it. I'm being completely sincere that only in Washington D.C. is $100 million not a lot of money. It is where I'm from. It is where I grew up. And I think it is for hundreds of millions of Americans.

VOICE: But the point is it's not a


[ OVERLAPPING SPEAKERS ]

VOICE: $8 billion being minuscule, $8 billion in earmarks. We were talking about that and you said that

VOICE: $100 million is a lot but $8 billion is small?

GIBBS: I think it all adds up, just as the president said, just as Jennifer was good enough to do in her question. If you think we're going to get rid of $1.3 trillion deficit by eliminating one thing, I'd be and the administration would be innumerably happy for you to let us know what that is.

GLENN: So why don't you just get rid of the $8 billion in earmarks? Why don't you just do that? Because it all adds up. No, no, no, the earmarks, that's such a minuscule amount. And by the way, I mean, let's just go through what he's talking about here. The typical family, the typical American family, this is the equivalent of you cutting out a latte per year. A latte per year. Do you think you could convince anyone on planet Earth with a straight face if you came home and you said, "Okay, we are spending out of control, our deficit is crazy, we're overdrawn at the bank, we're about to lose our house, we only have one thing left of value. That is our children's college fund and we are putting all of our debt into that children's college fund and that's the only thing we have left of value and you sat down at the table and you looked across the table at somebody and you said, yes, but I'm cutting out my latte. The response would be, "What?" Maybe somebody at the table would say, "Okay, it's a start. No latte for you anymore?" No, no, no, I just cut out my latte today. But today and every other day, but today I didn't buy a latte. That is what they are asking you to believe is a good thing.

I actually heard Mike Huckabee on the radio say, "Hey, it's a start." Bullcrap it's a start. It's a con game! A family who earns $100,000 a year and if you're faced with a $34,000 budget gap, so you are spending $134,000 every year but you're only bringing in $100,000, this is the equivalent of them giving up $3. You know what? I'm going to cut back three bucks. Three. It is not a start. It is an insult to the intelligence of the American taxpayer. Even the Associated Press said less than one quarter of the budget increase that congress awarded to itself. 4% of the military aid the United States currently sends to Israel. Less than half the cost of one F 22. 7% of the federal subsidy for the money losing Amtrak passenger rail system. 1/10,000th of the government's operating budgets for cabinet agencies, excluding the Iraq and afghan war and the stimulus bill. Obviously it's pathetic, but our president is counting on you not actually thinking. He just wants you to remember that he's cutting.

According to an article in Time magazine, the Obama administration has been working with behavioral psychologists throughout the campaign and he is still working with psychologists to figure out what his actions mean to you! And the best way to convince you that what he's doing is right! He's not doing what's right! He's doing what appears to be right! And he is talking to experts in behavioral science to figure that out! What will make them believe what I'm doing is right? How do we have a guy who is looking into the psychology of behavior to image himself as doing the right thing?

One of the things that psychology team has noticed is that people mostly aren't able to put big numbers in context. Do you think? It's no coincidence that Robert Gibbs can come out one week and tell you that $8 billion is not a lot of money and the next week play the $100 million is a lot card. They have found that if you propose a bill that is $10 million, $10 billion or $10 trillion, people react the exact same way. Yes, smart people like you will catch it, but the rest that are just hoping for change, those dolts, they don't see it. They are going to be the ones that take away, you know, why are these people protesting taxes at tea parties? Don't they know that 95% of all Americans are getting a tax cut? It's a mind game, and it's a mind game that your tax dollars are paying to be played against you. Who do you think is paying for the behavioral scientists? One of the things that this is Obama in his own words: One of the things that everybody here is mindful of as we move forward is dealing with this extraordinary economic crisis. We have a deficit and a confidence gap. When it comes to the American people, we have got to earn their trust. They have to feel confident that their dollars are being spent wisely. Is it a coincidence that he says they've got to feel confident that their dollars are spent wisely as opposed to "We have to spend their dollars wisely"? These people don't care. They don't look at that dollar that you worked for and sent in and paid somebody to find out how many dollars you need to send in. They don't care. They don't associate that dollar with your time, your energy or your hard work: They should be ashamed of themselves every time they spend a dollar. Every time they spend a dollar, they should ask, this is a sacred trust. Is that the best, most effective way we can spend that dollar? Should we spend that dollar? Why not just earn our trust by actually doing trustworthy things instead of meeting with behavioral scientists to trick us into trusting you. All you have to do is listen to this man's comments. You listen to this man's comments and you realize that the $100 million cut isn't even a cut. Where is anyone in the media explaining this to you? Quote: In the next few weeks we'll expect to cut at least 100 current programs in the federal budget I wish there was a period there so we can free up those dollars in order to put them to use in more critical areas like healthcare, education, energy or foreign policy. They're not cutting this to save money. They are cutting these things and shifting those dollars to foreign policy apparatus? What the hell is a foreign policy apparatus? He's cutting it from one area, turning right around and spending it in another. How is that a cut exactly?

Time after time, Americans have taken to the streets to defend our constitutional rights, whether it was our livelihood at stake -- or our lives. But, what was the point of all the civil rights movements that came before, if we're about to let the government take our rights away now?

On his Wednesday night special, Glenn Beck argued that Americans are tired of having our rights trampled by "tyrannical" leaders from state and local governments who are ignoring our unalienable rights during this pandemic.

"Our nanny state has gone too far. The men and women in office -- the ones closest to our communities, our towns, our cities -- are now taking advantage of our fear," Glenn said. "Like our brothers and sisters of the past, we need to start making the decisions that will put our destiny, and our children's destiny, back into our hands."

It took less than two months of the coronavirus tyranny to make America unrecognizable, but some Americans are fighting back, risking losing their jobs and businesses or even jail time, as they battle to take back our civil rights.

Here are just a few of their stories:

After New Jersey's Atilis Gym reopened in defiance of the governor's executive order, the Department of Health shut them down for "posing a threat to the public health." Co-owner Ian Smith says somebody sabotaged the gym's toilets with enire rolls of paper to create the public health "threat."

Oregon Salon owner, Lindsey Graham, was fined $14 thousand for reopening. She said she was visited by numerous government organizations, including Child Protective Services, in what she believes are bullying tactics straight from the governor's office.

77-year-old Michigan barber, Karl Manke, refused to close his shop even when facing arrest. "I couldn't go another 30 days without an income," he said. But when local police refused to arrest him, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer's (D) office suspending his business license instead.

Port of Seattle police officer Greg Anderson was suspended after he spoke out against enforcing what he called "tyrannical orders" imposed amid coronavirus lockdowns.

Kentucky mother-of-seven, Mary Sabbatino, found herself under investigation for alleged child abuse after breaking social distancing rules at a bank. After a social worker from child protective services determined there was no sign of abuse, he still sought to investigate why the Sabbatino's are homeschooling, and how they can give "adequate attention to that many children."

Dallas salon owner Shelley Luther was sentenced to seven days in jail after she defied the state-mandated stay-at-home orders to reopen her business.

Watch the video clip from Glenn's special below:


Watch the full special on BlazeTV YouTube here.

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 multiplatform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

It took less than two months of the coronavirus tyranny to make America unrecognizable. Leaders from state and local governments across the U.S. have flattened the curve of some of our most basic constitutional rights, but some Americans are fighting back — and risking jail time or losing their businesses.

On Wednesday night's GBTV special, Glenn Beck argued that we're witnessing the birth of a new civil rights movement — and it's time to build a coalition of common sense to keep America as we know it free.

Watch the full special below:

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 multiplatform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

On the radio program Thursday, Glenn Beck sat down with chief researcher Jason Buttrill to go over two bombshell developments that have recently come to light regarding former Vice President Joe Biden's role in the 2016 dismissal of Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.

"Wow! Two huge stories dropped within about 24 hours of each other," Jason began. He went on to explain that a court ruling in Ukraine has just prompted an "actual criminal investigation against Joe Biden in Ukraine."

This stunning development coincided with the release of leaked phone conversations, which took place in late 2015 and early 2016, allegedly among then-Vice President Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry, and Ukraine's former President Petro Poroshenko.

One of the audiotapes seems to confirm allegations of a quid pro quo between Biden and Poroshenko, with the later admitting that he asked Shokin to resign despite having no evidence of him "doing anything wrong" in exchange for a $1 billion loan guarantee.

"Poroshenko said, 'despite the fact that we didn't have any corruption charges on [Shokin], and we don't have any information about him doing something wrong, I asked him to resign,'" Jason explained. "But none of the Western media is pointing this out."

Watch the video below for more details:


Listen to the released audiotapes in full here.

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 multiplatform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

A recently declassified email, written by former National Security Adviser Susan Rice and sent herself on the day of President Donald Trump's inauguration, reveals the players involved in the origins of the Trump-Russia probe and "unmasking" of then-incoming National Security Adviser, Gen. Michael Flynn.

Rice's email details a meeting in the Oval Office on Jan 5, 2017, which included herself, former FBI Director James Comey, former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, former Vice President Joe Biden, and former President Barack Obama. Acting Director of National Intelligence, Richard Grenell, fully declassified the email recently amid President Trump's repeated references to "Obamagate" and claims that Obama "used his last weeks in office to target incoming officials and sabotage the new administration."

On Glenn Beck's Wednesday night special, Glenn broke down the details of Rice's email and discussed what they reveal about the Obama administration officials involved in the Russia investigation's origins.

Watch the video clip below: