Glenn Beck: Is massive Health Care plan reparations?


Glenn Beck's Common Sense


Available in book stores nationwide...

GLENN: First of all, let's just say this. This is a sensitive topic. Things in this monologue are going to be taken out of context and, you know, I'm going to be deemed a racist, and I don't care anymore. Say whatever you want. Let the chips fall. I know the truth. My family knows the truth. My friends know the truth. Whatever. There are strong feelings on both sides about reparations. I know you won't be surprised to hear that I'm opposed to reparations. To me ‑‑ hold on, rightwing zealot alert here ‑‑ there are eternal principles at stake. Or if you prefer, you can call them universal principles because that's in vogue now. First it's universal college, universal healthcare, universal government. If I just say it's a universal principle, maybe Obama can get behind it. But one of my fundamental beliefs in my faith is that I am not accountable for anybody else's sins. I'm only accountable for what I do. One of the things that drives me is I'm not accountable on whether you see the truth, don't see the truth, save yourself, don't save yourself. I am accountable for what I do. And if I see something and I don't warn you, then I am accountable for everybody that I didn't warn. However, if I warn them, that's your deal, man. You don't have to follow. You don't have to pay attention. You can reject it because you know what? Maybe I'm wrong. But if I believe it, I need to say it.

I'm not accountable for anybody else's sins. Not my ancestors, not my family's, not even Adam's. I am only accountable for what I do and that is something that I believe to my very core. But why is Barack Obama supposedly opposed to reparations? He doesn't share my faith. In fact, he attended a Black Liberation Theology church for 20 years. Black Liberation Theology teaches it is the white man that has kept you down. It is the white man that you must take money from, you must take power from to make up for the past. So that doesn't fit. Did he suddenly come down with that case of 24‑hour logic and reason that's not coming around Washington? No. He and everybody else has been immunized. So there's no chance of that. Did he realize suddenly that if he weren't to pay out reparations ‑‑ or if he were to pay out reparations to millions of African‑Americans that that would throw the door wide open to the Native Americans as well? And they wouldn't just want money. They want their land back. And the rest of us would all be on boats headed back to the mother land. The problem is I don't know what the mother land is anymore. Every country on Earth has been populated by people who are not indigenous to it. Every country on Earth has been bought, appropriated, conquered, stolen. I mean, I guess we could find the original bush or the original cave, you know, in Africa or Babylon where we first crawled out of and called it home, try to jam six billion people into it. The environmentalists would love it because it would be great for the rest of the planet, but they would be talking about how the cave life there for six billion would be unsustainable and bad for the bats.

So I'm guessing that's not why Obama claims he opposes reparations. Neither is he concerned about repairing other wrongs done to other groups of people. For instance, I think the Jews could make a pretty strong case against Germany for the whole World War II thing, you know. Not to mention Egypt, 400 years of bondage. But wasn't Barack Obama over there just now in Egypt blaming Egypt's problems on the Jews? What about reparations for slavery of the Egyptians enslaving the Jews? And on top of that, they've had to deal with Barbra Streisand. Can't we leave these people alone? Then there's the ethnic Albanians, the Kurds, the Tootsies, the Hutus, the nonmajority population of Darfur, the Cambodians. Nearly every other ethnicity that has ever arrived on the shores of this country has been at first beaten down. How about the Irish? Does Ted Kennedy's family need reparations? How about the Asians that built the railroads in slave‑like conditions? Do they need reparations? How about faith? How about the Jews? How about the Mormons? Does Mitt Romney, does he need reparations? He seemed to do pretty well for himself even though his faith, the people in his faith in the 1850s, same time as slavery, killed, tarred, feathered, dragged from their homes, beaten. Their homes their places of worship burned to the ground, chased by mobs in every place they settled starting in New York all the way across the country. The U.S. Army was sent in to attack them after they arrived in a city they called home. They decided not to when they got there. In Missouri the governor of the state issued an extermination order against them in 1838. An extermination order. It is the only one in the history of the country where it was legal to kill a group of people, and it wasn't rescinded until 1976. Did they receive reparations? No. All they got was Donnie and Marie and Harry Reid. These people can't even drink their way into drunken stupors to forget their troubles. They moved on. But none of that enters into Barack Obama's thinking. He doesn't even consider the 360,000 union troops killed in the Civil War as debt paid. And don't even think about asking him about affirmative action. That wasn't any kind of reparation. Neither was Black Entertainment Television, Black History month, United Negro College Fund, the Congressional Black Caucus, the NAACP, RainbowPUSH Coalition, 100 Black Men of America. None of these things could exist for whites. And Obama couldn't care less. It's not about doing the right thing and uniting.

Could it be that Obama realizes the incomprehensible nightmare that reparations would present to the country, things like who would pay, how much? Do all whites pay? Even if they can prove their ancestors weren't slave owners, weren't even here at the time? Would Hispanics and Asians pay? If so, how? How much? Maybe just the rich white would pay, say another 9 or 10% surcharge. What the heck. They can afford it. They don't even work for their money. They've been handed everything. These people don't work. They wake up in the morning. They tell their servants, "James, go out and pluck me some cash from my magic fairy money tree in the yard. I say $2 or $3 million should be enough for today. And then get out of my sight, you nauseate me. You have the sniffles? Oh, we should exterminate you."

Would Great Britain pay since this was their colony at the time slavery was instituted? How about the Dutch for their involvement? For that matter, what about the ancestors of black African slave traders who sold their own people in Africa in the first place? Then there's this question: Who would receive the money? All blacks? Or just those directly descended from slaves? Would Barack Obama, whose white mother was from Kansas and black father from Kenya? I know the story. I've only heard it more than I have heard about John McCain's war stories! Wait a minute. His father was not a descendant of slaves and his mother was white. So maybe Michelle Obama would be the only one that should be able to get the cash. Since Obama is half white and half black, would he pay and receive?

See, these are the tricky questions. But then again, they have nothing to do with Obama's objection to reparations. Obama is against direct reparations for one reason. He doesn't ever want the victim card to be lost. In 2004 he wrote, "I fear that reparations would be an excuse for some to say we've paid our debt and then avoid the much harder work." What is the harder work? What is the harder work? You don't want the debt paid because you don't ever want the leverage gone. The debt can never be paid. Instead he has a better idea. Universal healthcare and that's just the beginning. That's only one piece. Universal healthcare.

Let me ask you this: The green movement, how come his green jobs czar is a black nationalist? A communist black nationalist. A black nationalist again is the same kind of thinking of Jeremiah Wright. What does that have to do with green jobs? How was he a black nationalist militant, become communist, anarchist and then find the eco movement and then say this is the job for me? Because the green jobs czar isn't concerned about the planet. He's concerned about reparations. He's concerned about leveling the playing field. Universal healthcare is the next step. It's a much less obvious route to reparations. And if you think that I am making this up or this is just some conspiracy theory, this is what I was reminded of yesterday when I was walking down the hall and I looked at Stu and I said, didn't we do a monologue on that? Didn't he say something during the election that we did a monologue on and I said, look at this? This is what we found. Quote from Barack Obama: If we have a program, for example... he had rejected universal healthcare because ‑‑ I'm sorry. He had rejected reparations because reparations didn't go far enough. But if we have a program, for example, of universal healthcare that will disproportionately affect people of color because they are disproportionately uninsured, if we've got an agenda that says every child in America should get, should be able to go to college regardless of income, that will disproportionately affect people of color because it is oftentimes our children who can't afford to go to college.

Barack Obama is setting up universal healthcare, universal college, green jobs as stealth reparations. That way the victim status is maintained. And he also brings back back‑door reparations.

This would be crazy if he hadn't stated it himself. And if you couldn't pick up an organizational chart of the Democratic health plan and find next to the national coordinator for health the Office of Civil Rights and Office of Minority Health. I don't know if minorities are sicker than the rest or need different ‑‑ do they have different medicines for minorities? This wouldn't make sense. If in the health bill it didn't state that colleges that had a reputation and had an aggressive minority acceptance level in medical school that they would have better access to money, more access to money and a better partner. But don't worry. African‑Americans will get the reparations and if you are Jewish or you are Mormon, we'll play Barbra Streisand or Donny and Marie for you this morning and that should put a little salve on the old wounds.

In light of the national conversation surrounding the rights of free speech, religion and self-defense, Mercury One is thrilled to announce a brand new initiative launching this Father's Day weekend: a three-day museum exhibition in Dallas, Texas focused on the rights and responsibilities of American citizens.

This event seeks to answer three fundamental questions:

  1. As Americans, what responsibility do we shoulder when it comes to defending our rights?
  2. Do we as a nation still agree on the core principles and values laid out by our founding fathers?
  3. How can we move forward amidst uncertainty surrounding the intent of our founding ideals?

Attendees will be able to view historical artifacts and documents that reveal what has made America unique and the most innovative nation on earth. Here's a hint: it all goes back to the core principles and values this nation was founded on as laid out in the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.

Exhibits will show what the world was like before mankind had rights and how Americans realized there was a better way to govern. Throughout the weekend, Glenn Beck, David Barton, Stu Burguiere, Doc Thompson, Jeffy Fisher and Brad Staggs will lead private tours through the museum, each providing their own unique perspectives on our rights and responsibilities.

Schedule a private tour or purchase general admission ticket below:

Dates:
June 15-17

Location:

Mercury Studios

6301 Riverside Drive, Irving, TX 75039

Learn more about the event here.

About Mercury One: Mercury One is a 501(c)(3) charity founded in 2011 by Glenn Beck. Mercury One was built to inspire the world in the same way the United States space program shaped America's national destiny and the world. The organization seeks to restore the human spirit by helping individuals and communities help themselves through honor, faith, courage, hope and love. In the words of Glenn Beck:

We don't stand between government aid and people in need. We stand with people in need so they no longer need the government

Some of Mercury One's core initiatives include assisting our nation's veterans, providing aid to those in crisis and restoring the lives of Christians and other persecuted religious minorities. When evil prevails, the best way to overcome it is for regular people to do good. Mercury One is committed to helping sustain the good actions of regular people who want to make a difference through humanitarian aid and education initiatives. Mercury One will stand, speak and act when no one else will.

Support Mercury One's mission to restore the human spirit by making an online donation or calling 972-499-4747. Together, we can make a difference.

What happened?

A New York judge ruled Tuesday that a 30-year-old still living in his parents' home must move out, CNN reported.

Failure to launch …

Michael Rotondo, who had been living in a room in his parents' house for eight years, claims that he is owed a six-month notice even though they gave him five notices about moving out and offered to help him find a place and to help pay for repairs on his car.

RELATED: It's sad 'free-range parenting' has to be legislated, it used to be common sense

“I think the notice is sufficient," New York State Supreme Court Judge Donald Greenwood said.

What did the son say?

Rotondo “has never been expected to contribute to household expenses, or assisted with chores and the maintenance of the premises, and claims that this is simply a component of his living agreement," he claimed in court filings.

He told reporters that he plans to appeal the “ridiculous" ruling.

Reform Conservatism and Reaganomics: A middle road?

SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images

Senator Marco Rubio broke Republican ranks recently when he criticized the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act by stating that “there's no evidence whatsoever that the money's been massively poured back into the American worker." Rubio is wrong on this point, as millions of workers have received major raises, while the corporate tax cuts have led to a spike in capital expenditure (investment on new projects) of 39 percent. However, the Florida senator is revisiting an idea that was front and center in the conservative movement before Donald Trump rode down an escalator in June of 2015: reform conservatism.

RELATED: The problem with asking what has conservatism conserved

The "reformicons," like Rubio, supported moving away from conservative or supply-side orthodoxy and toward policies such as the expansion of the child and earned income tax credits. On the other hand, longstanding conservative economic theory indicates that corporate tax cuts, by lowering disincentives on investment, will lead to long-run economic growth that will end up being much more beneficial to the middle class than tax credits.

But asking people to choose between free market economic orthodoxy and policies guided towards addressing inequality and the concerns of the middle class is a false dichotomy.

Instead of advocating policies that many conservatives might dismiss as redistributionist, reformicons should look at the ways government action hinders economic opportunity and exacerbates income inequality. Changing policies that worsen inequality satisfies limited government conservatives' desire for free markets and reformicons' quest for a more egalitarian America. Furthermore, pushing for market policies that reduce the unequal distribution of wealth would help attract left-leaning people and millennials to small government principles.

Criminal justice reform is an area that reformicons and free marketers should come together around. The drug war has been a disaster, and the burden of this misguided government approach have fallen on impoverished minority communities disproportionately, in the form of mass incarceration and lower social mobility. Not only has the drug war been terrible for these communities, it's proved costly to the taxpayer––well over a trillion dollars has gone into the drug war since its inception, and $80 billion dollars a year goes into mass incarceration.

Prioritizing retraining and rehabilitation instead of overcriminalization would help address inequality, fitting reformicons' goals, and promote a better-trained workforce and lower government spending, appealing to basic conservative preferences.

Government regulations tend to disproportionately hurt small businesses and new or would-be entrepreneurs. In no area is this more egregious than occupational licensing––the practice of requiring a government-issued license to perform a job. The percentage of jobs that require licenses has risen from five percent to 30 percent since 1950. Ostensibly justified by public health concerns, occupational licensing laws have, broadly, been shown to neither promote public health nor improve the quality of service. Instead, they serve to provide a 15 percent wage boost to licensed barbers and florists, while, thanks to the hundreds of hours and expensive fees required to attain the licenses, suppressing low-income entrepreneurship, and costing the economy $200 billion dollars annually.

Those economic losses tend to primarily hurt low-income people who both can't start businesses and have to pay more for essential services. Rolling back occupational licenses will satisfy the business wing's desire for deregulation and a more free market and the reformicons' support for addressing income inequality and increasing opportunity.

The favoritism at play in the complex tax code perpetuates inequality.

Tax expenditures form another opportunity for common ground between the Rubio types and the mainstream. Tax deductions and exclusions, both on the individual and corporate sides of the tax code, remain in place after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Itemized deductions on the individual side disproportionately benefit the wealthy, while corporate tax expenditures help well-connected corporations and sectors, such as the fossil fuel industry.

The favoritism at play in the complex tax code perpetuates inequality. Additionally, a more complicated tax code is less conducive to economic growth than one with lower tax rates and fewer exemptions. Therefore, a simpler tax code with fewer deductions and exclusions would not only create a more level playing field, as the reformicons desire, but also additional economic growth.

A forward-thinking economic program for the Republican Party should marry the best ideas put forward by both supply-siders and reform conservatives. It's possible to take the issues of income inequality and lack of social mobility seriously, while also keeping mainstay conservative economic ideas about the importance of less cumbersome regulations and lower taxes.

Alex Muresianu is a Young Voices Advocate studying economics at Tufts University. He is a contributor for Lone Conservative, and his writing has appeared in Townhall and The Daily Caller. He can be found on Twitter @ahardtospell.

Is this what inclusivity and tolerance look like? Fox News host Tomi Lahren was at a weekend brunch with her mom in Minnesota when other patrons started yelling obscenities and harassing her. After a confrontation, someone threw a drink at her, the moment captured on video for social media.

RELATED: Glenn Addresses Tomi Lahren's Pro-Choice Stance on 'The View'

On today's show, Pat and Jeffy talked about this uncomfortable moment and why it shows that supposedly “tolerant" liberals have to resort to physical violence in response to ideas they don't like.