Glenn Beck: Misleading headline




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

GLENN: The New York Times has been involved with some gruesomely awesome journalism over the years, I mean gruesome stuff and their coverage of the year has done a great job of playing right into their self‑inflicted stereotypes. The headline in the New York Times on healthcare refers to one question in an 11‑page poll. Surprisingly enough the most favorable result for Obama in the entire questionnaire, even some normally fair liberal bloggers couldn't resist. The headline in the New York Times was wide support for government‑run health. Wide support for government‑run health. Wow. Wide support. The evidence? 72% of respondents say they approve of government providing a public option like Medicare for all, 72%. That's wide support for government‑run healthcare. 72%. How can you possibly argue? What's wrong with you, Beck? Well, let's look at the sample and start there. And some people have already done this. At the moment there are probably a few more Democratic leaning voters than Republican. McCain lost by 7% nationwide but not with the people taking this poll. The New York Times poll, McCain lost by 23 points. So it's a little heavy on the Obama supporters. But it goes further than this. Remember last week when a poll showed that there were about as double as many as conservatives as there were liberals? Forget about Republican/Democrat. Let's just do conservative liberal. Remember, more conservatives than liberal or independent. Double the amount of conservatives over liberals. And remember the time when they are like, "Yeah, you don't ever see that reflected in anything." Oh. Case in point. The New York Times found the exact same thing in February. 36% conservative, 20% liberal. But this time after the stimulus plan and all of the bailouts, somehow magically that has completely changed, now mysteriously. Some might even say gruesomely. They are only 29% conservative and 27% liberal from a 16% lead to a 2% lead since February and you'd think that conservative values would be growing at this time. I mean especially fiscally conservative values.

Now, isn't that enough to take the poll and realize that it's a ridiculous sample and throw it out and start over? No, uh‑uh, no, not for the New York Times. Not, you know, publishing all news that's fit to print and some of it actually read from time to time by a person. Those still trying to defend the poll will undoubtedly say, "Yeah, but still, I mean, you know, okay, so a slight majority of, you know, conservatives or Republicans, you know, back the public option." True, absolute, uh‑huh. Except that the question is built on a completely false premise. What a surprise. Kind of like, what? That story we were telling you about is absolutely true, it happened. Yes, but your reporter wasn't there. He made up everything. Kind of like that. I know that never happens at the New York Times. 72% support number is based on healthcare being... free. Oh. Well, hang on just a second. Stu, will you ask me a question? Do I support healthcare if it's free?

STU: Do you support healthcare if it's free?

GLENN: Yes. Ask me again.

STU: Do you support ‑‑

GLENN: Yes.

STU: Free ‑‑

GLENN: Yes. Yes, if we could somehow or another come up with a magic healthcare bean that sprouted doctors, sprays and surgical procedures for free, who's not there? Of course I'm there. I don't mean free when you go to the doctor's office. I mean no cost to the doctor's office and no cost via taxes, completely free. Healthcare, growing on a magic healthcare beanstalk. So of what possible value is it to even ask that question? Don't you think we should start questioning like the 30% that said no to absolutely free healthcare?

Let me ask you this: Who wants free unlimited private jet access on demand, with no carbon dioxide emissions? Me. Amazing. 95%. I question the 5%, but who cares what the answer is to that question! It's as relevant as, who thinks the government should be able to provide a magical ability to fly? Well, okay. Are you going to ‑‑ I'm just going to be able to fly? Absolutely. Okay, I'll do the flying thing. And then they take out a big staple gun and they staple wings to your back. Okay, wait a minute, wait a minute, I'm suddenly not for the whole flying thing. We know why they ask the question. They ask the question that way to get the result they want for their cute little headline, but when you look deeper, you realize how weak of a foundation they are standing on and they have got a staple gun and fake angel wings in their other hand. When asked if people support the public plan if they have to pay any taxes at all to fund it, the number drops from 72% to 57%. "Well, still that's a majority. That's not too bad." Yeah, yeah. Hang on. Buckle up because this is going to get really bad, really fast. Healthcare in the U.S. costs $650 per month per person. Not everybody in this audience. It is a self‑evident truth that the government would not be able to do the same thing for less cost. But to the New York Times, as you might expect, they probably think, you know, its possible costs would go down, all the while the service is going up because that's the way it always works with the government. But how far down? From $650 per month, how far down? What if I told you that they asked the question in a way that government healthcare would cut costs in half? You'd get this great healthcare and you'd only pay half. Would even the New York Times be that disingenuous to get a result they like? The answer, I'm happy to say, is no. The rest of that ‑‑ that's where the New York Times should just leave it. But the rest of that answer, so I'm not completely disingenuous with that headline, New York Times was not so disingenuous to cut healthcare costs in half. That would be the headline they would run. But if you red down into the article, you'd say, well, wow, that's great, until you got to the line where I said, they were worse than that. They went way further than that. The New York Times actually asked the question as if the government is going to be able to provide healthcare at 94% savings. They ask if you will pay less than $42 a month for government healthcare in taxes. Cost now, $650 per person per month. They ask, what do you say, where are they pulling this number? Are they pulling it directly out of their butt? I'm not ‑‑ I hope they washed that fact. $42 a month. Would you pay $42 a month as a maximum cost? Would you be willing or not willing to pay as much as $500 per year in taxes for universal healthcare? Okay? Surely you have wide ‑‑ what was the headline? Widespread support for government healthcare, when it costs a maximum of $42 a month. No, uh‑uh, uh‑uh. $42 a month, now it's not quite so widespread. The support for healthcare costing every American $42 a month plummets to 43%. From 72 to 43. So a poll that shows 43% of the people support government healthcare if it costs a maximum of $42 a month gets an article in the New York Times with the headline, "Wide support for government‑run healthcare." This is why people hate the New York Times. They wonder why isn't any body reading our paper? Why are we going out of business? No, no, no, you are not going out of business. There is wide support for people reading other things. The same poll that they took shows 63% think government healthcare would make the quality of their own healthcare worse. Where's the headline for that? There is wide support with the government's going to screw it all up. They didn't print that headline. Maybe it's this. I'm sure we'll see this one on. Maybe we'll see this one on ABC tomorrow night. 65% say it would hurt the economy. 65%. They are not willing to pay $42 a month, but they are 72% for free healthcare. If it's free, 72% are for it. But that's, say out of the 72%, 65 ‑‑ where's the headline in how about this headline? 68% say they are concerned that it would limit their access to medical tests and treatment. Where's the headline for that one? Almost 70% say I'm not going to get the healthcare that I need if they do this. How about 77% find their current healthcare to be affordable. 77%. The greatest healthcare system on planet Earth, 77% of us say it's affordable, and the headline reads, "Wide support for government‑run health." Maybe it's this: Almost every important question in the poll that was, you know, around back in the day of Hillary care in the Nineties has less support now than it did then. You might remember Hillary care as the program that miserably failed once the public started hearing the details of it. Where's the headline for that? Less support now with no details than Hillary care with details. How about the headline for that one? How about instead of we're all socialists now, wait, wait, wait, maybe we're not. Remember, all of this comes from a group that is ridiculously skewed towards the left, even for the standards of the New York Times poll. Those numbers I just gave you are ridiculously skewed to the left. Imagine if these numbers were accurate. Imagine if they actually had 40% conservative, 20% liberal, as we now know, that's the makeup of America. Can you imagine that? No, I can't imagine it in the newspaper. I can't imagine it on Fox or on this program. Again this is why people hate the New York Times. I personally just hate it because the crossword thing. I'm a red stator. I can't spell all them fancy words like "Hat." I don't know what ‑‑ hat, what's a hat? H‑O‑T. "No, Pa, that is hot." What's hot? My hat's hot? That's the way it is at my house on Sundays and I'm sure it is yours as well.

When Bevan Cooney — the former "junior" business partner to Hunter Biden and Devon Archer — went to jail in 2019, investigative reporter and New York Times bestselling author Peter Schweizer thought he'd never gain access to the damning emails Cooney had promised. That all changed three weeks ago when Schweizer was given complete access to Cooney's gmail account.

Schweizer joined Glenn Beck on the radio program Tuesday to describe just some of the business deals revealed within these emails — like Hunter working with an alleged Russian criminal and with Chinese communists to secure their assets, or to secure one-on-one time with his dad, then-Vice President Joe Biden. And all of this new information is completely separate from the emails allegedly discovered on Hunter Biden's laptop recently reported by the New York Post.

"So, I want to make this clear. This [Cooney's emails] has nothing to do with what's on the laptop … It didn't come from [Rudy] Giuliani. It didn't come from anybody else, right?" Glenn asked Schweizer.

"That's absolutely correct," Schweizer confirmed.

He briefly explained how Cooney, a former Los Angeles nightclub owner, is currently serving a prison sentence for his involvement in a fraudulent business bond scheme with Biden and Archer. From prison, Cooney gave Schweizer written permission to access his Gmail account.

"This is really important," he noted. "We're not looking at printouts. Not looking at PDFs. We're actually in his Gmail accounts themselves, sifting through these emails. And there's a shocking amount of information about deals involving China, involving Russia, involving all sorts of things they were trying to pull off."

Watch the video below to catch more of the conversation:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

The king of "No Spin" and bestselling author of "Killing Crazy Horse," Bill O'Reilly joined Glenn Beck on this week's podcast to talk about the latest developments in Joe Biden's Ukraine and China corruption scandal. Now that some of the details are finally coming out in the open, does the average Democrat care? Maybe, but the Left doesn't seem to.

O'Reilly argued there's more hatred for President Donald Trump now than in 2016, and that some people hate President Trump so much that they'd rather vote for the "senile, corrupt" Joe Biden.

"Hunter got tens of millions of dollars from Ukraine, from Russia, from China because his father was vice president. I have no doubt in my mind," O'Reilly said. "But the hatred for Donald Trump overrides that in the minds of millions of viewers. They're saying, 'You know, we'd rather have the senile corrupt guy than Trump.'"

Asked by Glenn if any other Republican running for president would be met with the same level of vitriol, O'Reilly answered, "The Left is the Left. They don't like America. The want to redo the Constitution. They want to take some of our freedoms, like the Second Amendment and the First Amendment, and change them. And they want to destroy capitalism and replace it with a big centralized government in Washington that controls the economy … but I'm talking about the folks. I have liberal friends and I say to them, 'Do you not understand that when you vote for Biden, you're voting against your own self interest?'"

Watch the video clip from the full podcast below, or find the full episode HERE:

Want to listen to more Glenn Beck podcasts?

Subscribe to Glenn Beck's channel on YouTube for FREE access to more of his masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, or subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

In a phone call with his constituents, Senator Ben Sasse (R-Neb) unleashed a torrent of criticisms about President Donald Trump, saying he "flirted with white supremacists," "kisses dictators' butts," and "spends like a drunken sailor."

On the radio program Friday, Glenn said he was disappointed in Sen. Sasse for apparently forgetting all of President Trump's accomplishments. Because, in reality, Trump has accomplished a lot more than many presidents before him.

Then, for anyone who may have forgotten President Trump's achievements — or who simply hate the man so much they've ignored them — Glenn listed just some of the many things this president has achieved during his three and a half years in the White House.

Watch the video below to hear Glenn's message for all the Trump-haters who have forgotten Trump's accomplishments, or you can read Glenn's list 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 multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

President Trump has given us great judges on the lower court, 3 judges far superior than Roberts and other bogus constitutionalists as SCOTUS and one just may turn out to be another Clarence Thomas. He kicked the ass of ISIS and came home.

He got us out of the disastrous Iran deal, killed their head of terror, boxed them in and is currently collapsing their economy while also brokering a Mid East peace deal that everyone said could never happen. He moved our embassy to Jerusalem despite the state department, something no president has done even though they all promised.

Yes, he met with the North Korean Dictator. I hated that, but I also hated the fact that no other president did anything and North Korea kept gaining power. He has gotten Europe to pay their share of NATO, brought the Arabs and the Jews together, while smashing the choke hold of the PLO, and stood up to the Chinese instead of selling them supercomputers (Clinton), accepting lead poison in dog food (Bush), or loving the CCP and taking millions in dirty money (Obama/Biden).

He also has defended religious liberty unlike any other president at least in the last 100 years, and is a true pro-life advocate that unlike most republicans backs it up with action instead of just talk.

President Trump has also opened doors that the GOP was too wussy to even try to open with Hispanics and Blacks. He again didn't pander. He instead cleared the dead wood and opened pathways up so they could get higher education, create jobs, and not get lost in the prison system.

He also has defended religious liberty... and is a true pro-life advocate.

President Trump also took on an economy that had been beaten down, a people who had been told "you didn't build that" and, in fact, Obama and Biden claimed that the economy was "as good as it would ever get," that we would never create jobs in sectors ever again.

President Trump gave us the lowest unemployment rate since 1969 (the year I celebrated my 5th birthday,) the lowest unemployment for Hispanics & Blacks ever, and the first real growth in pay that I can remember.

President Trump then responded to the largest pandemic in 100 years by doing a couple of things I have never seen a president do:

  1. America's biggest capitalist shuts down the entire economy and knowingly puts his re-election at risk in order to save people.
  2. Closes travel with China and Europe, only to be called “racist," "xenophobic" and accused of stirring hatred. Now everyone says they were for it, but he stood alone and took the heat.

When everyone bashed him because they thought he would seize control and become an authoritarian by telling states what to do, or taking control of companies and telling them what to produce, he simply asked the free market to step to the plate, because he trusts the people of this country to do the right thing. By not taking control, he was called a dictator and a Nazi. Meanwhile he has been blamed for the blood bath created by Gov. Cuomo's nursing home policies. They said 2 million would die, best case scenario 200,000 — if we did everything right. Gee, seems that we are now in the time period they told us would be phase two, it seems as though we seem to have hit that "best case scenario" at this point.

While all of this has gone on, President Trump has fought the lies that were started by Hillary Clinton's team to smear him as a Russian operative. It was enabled by the Obama White House and included the DOJ, CIA, Dept of State, FBI, and DNI. Did I leave anyone out? Oh, yeah we are now getting evidence that members of the Pentagon may have been involved as well. Not to mention the so-called "press" and Congress who did things that would embarrass not only "Frank Underwood" but also Kevin Spacey. He has single handedly exposed the press for who they are and have always been. Because of his tweets, personal style and frankly balls of steel, he has exposed those who truly are: "Enemies of the people." I hated that when he first said it, but it is true. Any person or group that knowingly lies to destroy our president, our Constitution and the free market, are not just enemies of the people, they are enemies of the freedom of all mankind.

As someone who didn't support President Trump at first (and that is putting it mildly) I remain honest enough to judge him on his entire record. He is perhaps the only man in America that can and has stood entirely alone, surrounded by enemies, surrounded by those who took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, who are now actively engaged in destroying it and any elected president who stands in their way.

Personally, I have grown sick and tired of spineless, do nothing, old, corrupt GOP politicians who are either part of the problem or too frightened to stand alone and speak up. The vast majority are all "Sunshine Patriots." History will condemn those who did nothing but complain and whine, while others not only rang the bell, but stood and took the hits, who risked it all and lost money, reputation and perhaps, God forbid, some who gave the ultimate sacrifice to fight the evil that rages so clearly against the light.

100 years from now history will judge all of us. So will our children's children. Most will be forgotten. Those who failed to show up on the battlefield or cower in the trees, will be remembered with shame and disdain. Others like President Trump, I believe will be seen as indispensable.