Glenn Beck: The most dangerous Czar




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


GLENN: Okay, now I have really good news. Do you remember when I said don't pay attention to what they want you to pay attention to because it's always what the other hand does. Remember that? What did they do last night after we got off the air? Last night when I went off the air, I said on the air, I believe Cass Sunstein is probably the most dangerous czar out there, but I had hope because we had three senators standing up against his confirmation because this guy is not actually a czar. They are calling him the regulatory czar but he has to be confirmed through the Senate. And there were three senators that ‑‑ what do they call this when they ‑‑

STU: Putting a hold on the nomination?

GLENN: Putting a hold on the nomination. We're checking now. I should have this information here in the next few minutes, but we're running some research on now on how many times have you had one senator put a hold on confirmation process and have it overturned. How many times in the history of our country have you had three senators stand up and say, no, no, no, hold.

STU: Probably every five weeks, just like the debt.

GLENN: It could be.

STU: It very well could be.

GLENN: Very good, thank you. Want to know how many times this has happened. Last night when we got off the air they announced that Harry Reid was going to push for cloture on Cass Sunstein so he would be confirmed today. Forget about healthcare. Rush Limbaugh, I saw a statement from him last night. He's absolutely right. It is a Trojan horse. You have no idea, neither do I, what they're building. But it ain't about health and it ain't about care. There is no compromise on anything. Engines at full stop. The republic is at stake, and there are too many people playing too many games. There are too many people playing ‑‑ they don't understand. They're willing to compromise because they're still playing the game as the game has always been played. The game was wrong in the first place, and the game is about to be over. Cass Sunstein is a guy who is against the Second Amendment who believes that the purpose of the Second Amendment is not an individual right but a federal right. He says almost all gun control legislation is constitutionally fine and if the Court is right, the fundamentalism does not justify the view. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to bear arms. He believes that the Second Amendment is the biggest ‑‑ I'm looking for the ‑‑ I'm looking for the exact quote ‑‑ is the biggest lie in American history. He also believes that we ought to ban hunting. He says willingness to subject animals to suffering will be seen as a form of barbarity, morally akin to slavery and the mass extermination of human beings. He believes that animals should have a right, should be able to bring suit because they are not property. You can't own a dog. They should be able to sue you. They would also have a right to property as well. So if you've got an animal that is roaming around, well, gee, we have to have their ‑‑ that's their property. That's where they live.

PAT: He would be fun to have on a hunting trip, hunting, fishing.

GLENN: Just crying himself to sleep.

PAT: Be great.

GLENN: On free speech Cass Sunstein says, quote, many discussion groups and websites less and often more extreme that can be found on the Internet. Discussion groups and websites of this kind have been around for a number of years. On the National Rifle Association's "Bullet N Board," a place where discussions of matters of mutual interest, someone calling himself Warmaster explained how to make bombs out of ordinary household will materials. Warmaster explained these simple, powerful bombs are not very well known even though all the materials can be easily obtained by anyone including minors. That is why he would like to control the Internet. A legislative effort to regulate broadcasting in the interest of Democratic principles. Wow, that's the words that Chavez always used. Should not be seen as an abridgement of the free speech guarantee. Regulate broadcast in the interest of Democratic principles is not an abridgement of the free speech guarantee. A system of limitless individual choices with respect to communications is not necessarily in the interest of citizenship and self‑government. On civil liberties courts should ordinarily require restrictions on civil liberties to be authorized by the legislature. On taxes Sunstein scolds readers like small‑minded selfish children for opposing the size, scope, expansion and skyrocketing expense of the government. Quote: In what sense in the money in our pockets and bank accounts are fully ours. Did we earn it by our autonomous efforts? Could we have inherited it without the assistance of probate courts? Do we save it without the sport of bank regulators? Could we spend it if there were no public officials to coordinate the efforts and pool the resources of the community in which we live. Without taxes there is no liberty. He also believes that we need a second Bill of Rights. In a nutshell, quoting, the New Deal helped vindicate a simple idea. No one really opposes government intervention. Even the people who most loudly denounce government interference depend on it every single day. For better or worse, the Constitution's framers gave no thought to including social and economic guarantees in the Bill of Rights. This will be a gigantic move in the direction of gigantic government because let me explain what he's going to do. He's the author of a book called Nudge. He doesn't believe that anybody should be told what to do through regulation, through laws, new laws. We're not going to ban meat. This is a guy who thinks that rats should be able to have attorneys. If you have rats in yo ur basement, you are not to poison rats. You can't make this stuff up.

Here's what his job is. He doesn't want to change the laws. All he wants to do is just tweak the regulations. So the laws are passed and then he tweaks the regulations. We've seen this ‑‑ this is what's happening right now in California with the farmers. The animals have to be saved. The smelt, a four‑inch fish, the smelt needs to be saved. Farmers can't use that much water. So they've reduced the water supply to farms by, what is it, 80 or 90%. Well, the farmers ‑‑ this is an area now that has 28 to 40% unemployment. The farmers cannot farm. They don't have enough water. All for the smelt. That is what a regulatory czar does: Well, let's just ‑‑ he can't have that much water. He turns the knobs, 5% here, 3% here, 8% here, 12% here. And before you know it, well, for instance, he doesn't want you to eat meat. He thinks it's wrong. We shouldn't have cattle slaughtered and sheep and lamb. That's wrong. So let's make sure that he oversees the fish and wildlife department regulations. Let's make sure that we tweak those regulations. Oh, there's a bucktooth beaver mouse that happens to go into the grazing lands. Well, that animal, they have a right to property, and, and they're endangered. So let's tweak that a bit. Let's make those grazing lands a little more difficult for people to control, a little more difficult for you to graze your cattle on. We just tweak that a little bit. I'm not saying that we're stopping cattle ranches. That's crazy talk. Let me just quick it, making it more difficult. Oh, and by the way, I'm going to regulate a little more on the feed and the grain that are federal to the cattle. And we need to get in with the FDA, we need to have a little stiffer regulations on the way our inspections are done and the butchering of the cattle and let's just tweak just a little bit on how it's transported. Before you know it, your $8 steak is now $25. Well, he hasn't done anything. He's just made it harder for farmers to make and grow cows to give you beef. This is the way it ends. Today they are going to vote for cloture. They are doing it while everybody's talking about healthcare. Harry Reid, this guy has three holds on him. They need 60 votes. They cannot get 60 votes with Ted Kennedy gone. But that means every single Republican must stand against Cass Sunstein, and most of these weasels in Washington haven't done their homework enough to know who this guy is. They haven't pieced this together because nobody for some reason will look at the whole picture. Well, I have to tell you, I have seen you educate those in congress. I have seen it happen. I've seen it with the Republican who said whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, there are no communists in the White House. And I've seen the town hall where people stand up, "Van Jones!" Who? What? And you educated him. I've seen it happen with my own eyes. You are on it. It is time to get everyone you know to call Capitol Hill. Call the Senate. Democrats, listen. Your hunting rights are at stake. Your gun rights are at stake. He's never going to change the laws and that's what they'll tell you. And it's true. He'll never change the laws. He's just going to make everything more difficult. For instance, they haven't banned guns in New York City. But try to get one! They haven't made it illegal. They've just made it impossible to be able to get past the regulation. That is what his expertise is. The most dangerous guy out there right now. I thought we had more time. We don't. You have ‑‑ I don't even know. They haven't announced when that vote is coming, but you better burn up the phone lines now. Democrats, you've got to call your Democratic ‑‑ there are, I believe there's one Democrat that has his name on the list that says a hold but doesn't want his name released. You've got to call your Democrats. Any, anybody who lives in a state where it is farming, anybody who lives in a state where they are sensitive to the Second Amendment, anybody who cares about free speech on the Internet! Let alone broadcast. Forget about broadcast. The Internet! It is the only lifeline that you'll have. You've got to call them today. You vote no on Cass Sunstein. No on Cass Sunstein. Call them now. They're trying to get this through today before you are real ly informed on who this guy is.

Stu, what is the Web address with all of the quotes of him?

STU: StopSunstein.com has a lot of them.

GLENN: Okay. Go there. We'll include it in the free e‑mail newsletter but we'll put a blast out hopefully this morning with this. You have to do this now and you have to wake everybody up, right now. Gigantic loss if he's confirmed. And they're going to do it today.

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.