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.

On the Basis of Sex. I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you probably didn't expect those five words to come out of me this morning. No, that's not my version of a clickbait headline to get you to pay attention — although that probably just happened — but this is the title to the new movie based on the life of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

RELATED: Here's the Problem With the New Ruth Bader Ginsburg Documentary

Progressives and liberals have been hovering over YouTube like a pack of rabid wolves, anxiously awaiting the first trailer to drop. And — three days — they got their wish. Something in the last few seconds caught my ear. Watch:

Now my first thought after hearing that went something like this: The word "freedom" is literally the fifth frigging word in the first sentence of the First Amendment. It shows up for the second time just two sentences later. How do you screw that up? I always assumed that liberal Hollywood movie makers had never really read the Constitution, but this is just sad.

But my second thought was that maybe they don't consider the Bill of Rights actually part of the Constitution. However, according to the National Constitution Center, the Bill of Rights officially became part of the Constitution — not a separate document — when it was ratified in 1791. This is rather easy to fact check, so there's really no excuse here.

But then I had another thought. Either liberal Hollywood forgot that the Constitution changed in 1791, or they actually prefer the vaguer pre-1791 version of the Constitution where God-given rights can be excluded if the state so pleases. Think about it. The Bill of Rights is the single greatest roadblock to the radical Left's "progress." Do you hate the fact that private gun ownership encourages self reliance and personal freedom? Do you also hate the fact that dissenting views, opinions and speech can't be silenced and crushed? Then the Bill of Rights is a clear and present danger to your agenda. It's enemy number one.

The new Left that is radically moving toward the extreme absolutely abhors the year 1791.

You see, the new Left that is radically moving further toward the extreme absolutely abhors the year 1791. They wish it never happened. The Bill of Rights is a constant reminder that some FREEDOMS can't be given by the government, they're granted by GOD. And that thought — you being aware of that — scares the hell out of them.

Now, it's possible I thought too much into this. It's also possible the screen writer made a simple mistake and thought Ruth Bader Ginsburg was actually born before 1791, figuring it would be a nice tip of the hat to her longevity. I can actually see how you could make that mistake. But it's also possible that this is a sign of the times we live in.

The Bill of Rights is under attack, maybe more now than ever. It's never been more important to let the Constitution of 1791 be our guide, true north and lighthouse.

UPDATE: Here's how the discussion went on radio. Watch the video below.

How did this slip by?

The Left has been foaming at the mouth waiting for this movie to drop and when the trailer finally hit the interwebs, it ended with an embarrassing factual error about the Constitution.

What will happen when the Titan kneels?

Spencer Platt/Getty Images

You can tell that the NFL season is approaching because you can hear the whining from highly-paid athletes as they prepare their kneepads for some kneeling.

In May, the NFL instated a policy that penalizes players who take a knee during the national anthem.

RELATED: VIRTUE SIGNALLING: It's time for the NFL to dump the politics

"A club will be fined by the League if its personnel are on the field and do not stand and show respect for the flag and the Anthem," the statement said. "The Commissioner will impose appropriate discipline on league personnel who do not stand and show respect for the flag and the Anthem."

Tennessee Titan's defensive end Jurrell Casey has decided that he will continue his whining and kneeling.

"I'm going to take my fine," Casey said in an interview. "It is what it is, I ain't going to let them stop me from doing what I want to do. If they want to have these battles between players and organizations, this is the way it's going to be."

Maybe Casey can find work elsewhere. I hear that Universities love to hire self-righteous ranting lunatics.

He added that "At the end of the day, we got to do a job, but I will continue to use my platform to keep on speaking up."

Yes, he does have a job to do. And that job is playing football. His bosses have made it clear that political activism is not part of the job. Who knows, maybe Casey can find work elsewhere. I hear that Universities love to hire self-righteous ranting lunatics. There's also Starbucks. They need a self-righteous CEO.

All anyone can talk about right now is Russia and collusion, and for good reason. Special Counsel Robert Mueller just indicted 12 Russian intelligence officers for cyber attacks and the hacking of cyber-systems in energy, nuclear, water, and manufacturing sectors which you can read about here.

RELATED: There are three tribes when it comes to Trump and Russia: Which tribe do you belong to?

The Trump-Russia scandal, in a word, is maniacal. There are many moving parts that are very hard to solve — or simply don't want to be solved. All of these are "mysteries wrapped in an enigma," asserted Glenn on Wednesday's episode of "The Glenn Beck Radio Program."



From the curious case of Imran Awan to the hacking of DNC servers to "Russian" meddling in elections via social media, all of these deserve scrutiny.

On today's episode, Glenn examined seven scandals that make up the Russia connection:

  1. Russian operatives who used social media to divide Americans during the 2016 election.
  2. The meeting at Trump Tower between Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, Paul Manafort, and Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya.
  3. The Fusion GPS Dossier funded by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.
  4. Voter fraud in Illinois.
  5. Hillary Clinton's emails.
  6. Imran Awan. Awan was an IT staffer for Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives who was part of a federal investigation and was arrested on bank fraud charges.
  7. Lastly, the 2016 DNC email leaks.

For the entire explanation, tune into the podcast below:


This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

When it comes to Donald Trump, Glenn Beck argues that there are three tribes that categorize the way people examine him regarding his foreign and domestic policy.

Tribe one is the #Resistance. They are the ones who believe that everything President Trump does is bad. They're also the ones who call for impeachment and who label President Trump a "treasonous traitor" even before a summit with a foreign leader takes place.

RELATED: Russia hacking Hillary's emails is no laughing matter

Those, according to Glenn's analysis, include groups like Think Progress, who published an article suggesting that women's rights would be rolled back if the President's SCOTUS nominee is confirmed by the Senate. This tribe also includes progressive talking heads and far Left publications and politicians like The New York Times and Hillary Clinton.

Tribe two are those who defend the President and his actions at all costs. He can do no wrong. These are the people who deny the President's mistakes. They believe the President is a master chess player and everyone else is a pawn in Trump's game.

Both who operate in tribes one and two maintain a "win at all costs" mentality. They don't care what happens as long as their side wins. Glenn calls this a "cult of personality madness."

Tribe three are those who are "free thinkers." These people question the President with boldness and aim for intellectual honesty when evaluating the President's policies and behavior.

Glenn believes tribe one and tribe two are smaller than tribe three.

So, what do all these tribes have to do with Trump and the Russians? Find out in the clip below.

Where do you fall when it comes to Trump and Russia?

When it comes to Donald Trump, Glenn argues that there are three tribes that categorize the way people examine him regarding his foreign and domestic policy.


This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.