Glenn Beck: Who's the extremist?


Arguing with Idiots: How to Stop Small Minds and Big Government


by Glenn Beck

GLENN: It is good to be back, where we can talk some sanity. I'm curious. Granted, I've been down for a couple of days, but has anybody heard anybody over at the White House label Nidal Malik Hasan the terrorist who killed 13 and wounded 30 more at Fort Hood an extremist? Have you heard that label come from anyone, anyone, at the White House, an extremist? I heard him referred as a shooter, a gunman. I know he's been called troubled, harassed. I know that he had a bumper sticker scraped off of his car. Oh, no, not a bumper sticker. Where is my gun? I know he didn't want to be deployed. His cousin called him a good America a good American. I'm hate to think of the good Americans that are on that list of shooting 13 people and still, you know, falling on the list of good there's one. I have yet to hear him be called by anybody, either by the White House or the king of the extremist label, Frank Rich of the New York Times, an extremist. Have you heard it?

It's interesting, isn't it? I mean, because if there was anyone lately who could be labeled an extremist, you would think that it might be somebody who spoke of Islamic jihad to his fellow soldiers and then acted on those feelings by picking up a weapon and killing his fellow soldiers with it. I mean, it seems pretty clear cut in the extremist realm. But, instead, it is you, it is the tea party goer, it is you that quote Thomas Jefferson, you that say, where is the honor of George Washington, you that can quote Ben Franklin saying, you want to get people out of poverty? Make them uncomfortable in their poverty. You, you are the one labeled as an extremist. And that's because you clearly, I mean, you spoke fondly of small government and picked up a sign much that's pretty scary stuff. You and your kids with little, you know, sprinkles made the signs. I mean, you're indoctrinating your children. Of course a you're an extremist. Sarah Palin is extremist. She fought for this overhaul, ran for Vice President, espousing principles. She didn't follow the conventional wisdom of what she should do, according to what they say she should do. She's an extremist. She's out of control. I'm an extremist. I dare expose what no one else will, that there are anti free market officials now, Marxists, socialist, self proclaimed communists in and around the White House. I think I'm an extremist because I think that is probably not a good idea, but Nidal Malik Hasan, oh, he just he was picked upon, he was misunderstood, he was quiet, he was a good American. He just snapped. That's my favorite from the President. He just snapped. Murdered 13 Americans in his snapping. He talked openly about his feelings before acting on them. Did he hear Nancy Pelosi's speech? She said we should watch the language because people might get shot. She's seen it before, you know, of course, not from anyone like Nidal Malik Hasan. No, no, no. The tea party people. You should watch their language. There's consequences to language unless you're a Nidal Malik Hasan. Then, then there's no consequence. No, you just snapped. Why did he snap? I don't know. I don't care, really. He murdered Americans in cold blood. What do you say we don't care about how he snapped or why. It was an act of bald face extreme terrorism. He's an extremist. He's a terrorist. He should be tried, tried fairly, quickly, and if he is found guilty, executed. Done. I'm sorry. Is that too extreme? Good heavens, America. Look what they're doing to us. Look how far the discussion has shifted.

You're seeing it, hearing it everywhere now. Anyone and everyone who effectively stands in the way of the progressive agenda is a fudged mentalist, an extremist, anybody who is against the fundamental transformation of America, well, you're a danger. We don't call Nidal Malik Hasan a Muslim extremist, a terrorist. No, we call him a gunman, a gunman, a man with a gun because the gun was the bad part. Frank Rich and the rest of the Obama mentions of the New York Times, which, by the way, we should start taking bets on how soon they go out of business or no. I'm sorry how soon before they are taken over by the United States government because they are too big to fail. They will gladly too the bidding of this administration because they're too big to fail. They will act as a propaganda arm of the White House. They will act as the propaganda arm of this nation's enemies abroad, rich and the rest of continue to oblige in print and the patrols at MSNBC will eagerly spew the company line on television, you're extreme, he's extreme, they're dangerous, they're hate. Outrageous, frightening. Did you see that sign? Meanwhile, the truly hateful, frightening dangers go unobstructed, along their merry way, because they're just being picked on. He had a bumper sticker scraped off his bumper, you know. George Washington used to call this the battle field of ideas. When did words and ideas replace fists and bullets as tools of violence? No one at the White House or the New York Times has referred to the beat downs issued by SEIU members recently as violent or extreme. We just had another one over the weekend. If I had another appendix, it might burst, too, from the lack of coverage. The SEIU thugs thought on videotape beating down an African American tea party goer. That guy in St. Louis hasn't even been charged. Is it extreme? Is it an extremist to beat someone down because they disagree with you on health care? No, no, apparently not, huh uh. No, no. Standing up against this health care reform, that's extreme and dangerous and on the wrong side of history. The terrorist murderer who shot the Army recruiter dead in Arkansas last wasn't even discussed in the media, let alone called an extremist, but you, me, well so, as long as that's our new reality, I'd like to make a list of demands with you, my fellow extremists. If we are a danger to this country, well, then let's be a danger to this country. Let's go ahead and make a list of our extremist demands because, oh, my, they are extreme. I'm going to start with the toughest one. This is going to put me in the kook territory. Oh, look out. I demand that this government stop spending money that they don't have. Yes, I know. I'm an extremist. I'm a crazy. I'm a radical. I'm a danger to this country by saying, what do you say you don't spend the money that you don't have? Stop spending my grandchildren's money and I'm going to be so I'm going to show you that I've been rooted in extremism for so long, I've been saying that for 10 years. Yeah. Here's another extremist thought. This is crazy. This is crazy. Look out. Somebody call the Department of Homeland Security well, don't bother them now because they found out from Janet Napolitano that working to, quote they're working on several programs now to make sure that there's no anti Muslim violence perpetrated as a result of this shooting. So, Department of Homeland Security is really quite busy working on that anti Muslim violence that we see so much of every day. I mean, Nidal had a bumper sticker scratched off his car. Did you know that? Somebody just write this down and when the Department of Homeland Security gets around to extremists like me, you just remind them that here's another one of my demands. Tell us how you're going to pay for a trillion dollar health care plan. In fact, since we have to pay for it three years before it even starts, what do you say you kick in the savings three years before it starts, before we sign on, you show me for three years you can save the money that you're promising us you're going to save and find. Meanwhile, I'll sit over and eat me Lucky Charms.

Here's another extremist demand. You listen to the people. After all, you work for the people. This used to be a country of laws and not of men. Now we see it's a country of companies, special interests, idea logs. Laws? Excuse me? How about you listen to the people? 35 percent of the American people want this. Would you ever go to war with a 35 percent approval rating? Would you ever do it? Here's another extremist demand. Get rid of the corruption before you spend another dime. Why, why would I why would I, as an extremist, find it reasonable to people who are so riddled with corruption, the guy who writes the tax code can't even figure out how to pay his own taxes? Then says, oh, well, that was just over oversight. So, he amends his taxes. Oh. And, gosh, after he turns that in and it's found that he missed another what was it? Million and a half dollars? Well, that's just another oversight. How many oversights before we start emptying out the prisoners the prisons in our country, making room for all the people in Washington that belong behind bars? I know that's extreme. It's extreme. It is. Return to the principles embedded by our radical extremist founding fathers and you know another thing about this extremist thing? I can't understand it. We're either extremists or we're just involved in the politics of the past. The old, tired politics, the ones that have been tried and tried and tried and continue to fail. Well, you can't be extremist if you don't want to make any changes. How could you possibly be extremist? I mean, I'm sorry, I'm going to go for radical, a radical change in my treatment? Yes, yes. He's advocating radical changes for his treatment. We're going to treat him exactly the same as we've been treating him the whole time. Woe! So, I'm either part of the politics of the past or I'm a radical, but if you want to say that I'm a radical, you better check out the radicals that I subscribe to, the radicals that I read, not Saul Alinsky, not Stalin, not Mao. I look to the radicals of the 1700's, from the period of, currently referred to as the period of enlightenment. You know, those radicals, the radicals of the enlightenment, the radicals that brought us out of the dark ages, those radicals. How could those radicals, 225 years old, how could those radicals possibly, possibly be radicals today? They're 230 years old, these ideas. Unless they haven't been employed for about 100 years. See, these ideas that our founders have, I write it in the first paragraph, I believe, of Common Sense, the fastest way to be deemed a radical in today's society is to quote our founding fathers. How is that possible, if those are just the politics of the past? They're only radical because you haven't heard them for awhile. This country hasn't been living by those words or those ideas. Oh, they're extreme. Let me quote one of those extreme tests, if you want to help the poor, help them feel uncomfortable in their poverty. Well, that extremist was Ben Franklin, from the age of enlightenment. Why did he hate the poor so? Our extremist radical founders all knew that government programs were not the answer to poverty. They led to poverty. Making people comfortable in their poverty is not the answer to get them out of poverty. It is the answer for government officials who gain power by making sure that poverty stricken become permanently dependent upon them. Hello, Detroit! I'm sorry. Is that too extreme for you? It used to be called common sense. It used to be called the truth.

Here's the problem: No matter how much we expose the anti free market, big government takeover that's happening right now, they just keep going because there's not enough Americans aware yet. There was some sort of measurement done by I don't know who recently on the impact of this program. They measured somehow I don't know how all this works, but they somebody measured the footprint of TV and radio and books and everything else. They did some sort of estimate on the Glenn Beck footprint. It is around 30 million people a month supportedly supposedly 30 million people check out the radio, TV shows, at least in whole or in part every single month. Again, I have no idea how this was done. But why understand anything anymore? It's all magic, pixie fairy dust that makes things happen, but let's just say that that's accurate, for the sake of argument. That would still only be 10 percent of this nation, 10 percent. Is hearing this message. I don't know where the tipping point is, but I'm going as hard and as fast as I possibly can. Unfortunately, so is America's adversaries. I know that websites like the Huffington Post put things, you know, on the Internet. Well, you know what? My friend, it is time that you do the same. It is time for you to mobilize. It is time for you to realize that you are an extremist. Um. You're Ben Franklin. You know, he was printing extremist material on a printing press. Oh, yeah. Samuel Adams did the same thing. They used a little something called the newspaper, when the newspapers were against the government, because they knew the government was full of corrupt officials. At the White House the New York Times and the rest of the media, they'll paint you as a kook, as an extremist. I don't care. I'll stand with those revolutionaries, Thomas Paine, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson. It's time we moved past the nonsense. I'm trying, but for the most part, I feel pretty alone in the media and I need your help to get the message out. You don't have to credit me. You can watch or not listen or not subscribe or not steal my material. I don't really care. Repackage it. Find the ways to get this message out. Find the ways. We're doing the work for you. We're giving you the material. We're making sure it's accurate. Repackage it. Find the way to reach out to your friends. Some copyrights do apply. Void where prohibited. Not valid in Hawaii. See dealer for details. Spread the message. Again, I don't know how the survey was done back then, but I've read that the American revolution turned on 20 percent of the citizens back then, 20 percent. Gang, just with this show, we're halfway there. Fortify, know what's real, spread the word, surround yourself with like minded people. Call a terrorist a terrorist. I personally wouldn't tear a bumper sticker off somebody's car, but I also don't think if somebody did, it doesn't mean you pick up a gun and shoot 13 people.

In the final days before the 2020 election, President Donald Trump is gaining among black voters, particularly men, because his record of accomplishments "speaks for itself" and the "façade" that President Trump is a racist "just doesn't ring true," argued sports columnist Jason Whitlock on "The Glenn Beck Radio Program" Tuesday.

Jason, who recently interviewed the president at the White House for OutKick.com, shared his thoughts on why he believes many black Americans — notably celebrities such as Kanye West, Ice Cube, and 50 Cent — are breaking from the "façade" that President Trump is a "flaming racist."

"I really believe the facts are starting to speak for themselves, and that Donald Trump's record of accomplishments, particularly as it relates to African Americans, speaks for itself," Jason told Glenn. "He actually has a record to stand on, unlike even Barack Obama. When [Obama] was president, I don't think he had much of a record to stand on, in terms of, 'Hey, what did he actually deliver for African Americans?' President Trump has things he can stand on and, you know, beyond that I think black people understand when he starts talking about black unemployment rate. And America's unemployment rate. And then, when you add in for black men, the façade we've been putting on [President Trump] … you know, this whole thing that he's some flaming racist, it just doesn't ring true."

Jason suggested that Trump's fearlessness, unabashed masculinity, and record of keeping his promises resonates with men in the black community. He also weighed in on how media and social media's bias plays a huge role in convincing people to hate President Trump while ignoring Antifa and others on the Left.

"I keep explaining to people, Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, they're some of the most secular places on earth. And we've reduced everyone to a tweet, that we disagree with," he added.

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.

Megyn Kelly is not happy about the "disgusting" media coverage of President Donald Trump, specifically pointing to Lesley Stahl's "60 Minutes" interview on CBS Sunday.

On the radio program, Megyn told Glenn Beck the media has become so blinded by the "Trump Derangement Syndrome" that they've lost their own credibility — and now they can't get it back.

"It's disgusting. It's stomach-turning," Megyn said of the media's coverage of the president. "But it's just a continuation of what we've seen over the past couple of years. Their 'Trump Derangement Syndrome' has blinded them to what they're doing to their own credibility. They can't get it back. It's too late. They've already sacrificed it. And now no one is listening to them other than the hard partisans for whom they craft their news."

Megyn also discussed how she would have covered the recent stories about Hunter and Joe Biden's alleged corruption. 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.

Imagine sometime next year, getting called before HUWAC – the House Un-Woke Activities Committee.

"Are you or have you ever been a member of the un-woke?"

Something like that is not as far-fetched as you might think.

Last week, Robert Reich, the former Secretary of Labor during the Clinton administration, now a UC Berkeley professor, tweeted this:

Since the 1970s, there have been dozens of "Truth Commissions" around the world like the kind Robert Reich wants in America. Most of these have been set up in Africa and Latin America. Usually it happens in countries after a civil war, or where there's been a regime change – a dictator is finally overthrown, and a commission is set up to address atrocities that happened under the dictator. Or, as in the commissions in East Germany and Czechoslovakia, atrocities under communism. Or, in the most famous example, South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation commission addressed the decades of apartheid that ravaged that nation.

These commissions usually conclude with an official final report. These commissions and reports have served as a means of governments trying to close a dark chapter of their country's history, or provide emotional catharsis, as a way to generally move on. Sometimes it kind of works for people, most of the time it leaves people clamoring for more justice.

Here's how one professor described truth commissions in an article in The Conversation last year. He wrote:

The goal of a truth commission… is to hold public hearings to establish the scale and impact of a past injustice, typically involving wide-scale human rights abuses, and make it part of the permanent, unassailable public record. Truth commissions also officially recognize victims and perpetrators in an effort to move beyond the painful past… Some have been used cynically as tools for governments to legitimize themselves by pretending they have dealt with painful history when they have only kicked the can down the road.

See, this is the problem with a lot of "Truth" commissions – they are inherently political. Even if you trust your government and give them all the benefit of the doubt in the world that their Truth commission is trying to do the right thing, it is ALWAYS going to be political. Because these truth commissions are never set up by those who have LOST power in government. They're always established by those who have WON power.

The Deputy Executive Director of the International Center for Transitional Justice says one of the main points in these Truth commissions is that "the victims become protagonists."

A Department of Anti-racism is entirely within the realm of possibility.

So, who are the victims in Robert Reich's America? People like him, members of the far-Left who had to endure the atrocities of four years of a president with different political ideas. What an injustice. I mean, the left's suffering during the Trump administration is almost on the level of apartheid or genocide – so we totally need a Truth commission.

There have been lots of calls for the U.S. to have its own Truth and Reconciliation commission, especially around racial injustice.

This past June, Democratic Congresswoman Barbara Lee of California introduced legislation to establish the " United States Commission on Truth, Racial Healing, and Transformation."

Ibram X. Kendi – the high priest of anti-racism, and author of Target's current favorite book " Antiracist Baby" – proposes a Constitutional anti-racism amendment. This amendment would:

establish and permanently fund the Department of Anti-racism (DOA) comprised of formally trained experts on racism and no political appointees. The DOA would be responsible for pre-clearing all local, state and federal public policies to ensure they won't yield racial inequity, monitor those policies, investigate private racist policies when racial inequity surfaces, and monitor public officials for expressions of racist ideas. The DOA would be empowered with disciplinary tools to wield over and against policymakers and public officials who do not voluntarily change their racist policy and ideas.

If you think that is far-fetched, you haven't been paying attention to the Left's growing radicalism. In a Joe Biden-Kamala Harris administration, a Department of Anti-racism is entirely within the realm of possibility. And of course, such a DOA would never stop at policing government.

We're in a dangerous, precarious moment in our history. Given the events of 2020, should Democrats gain the White House, the Senate, and the House, how many commissions will be in our future? They will suddenly have plenty of political capital to drag the nation through years of commission hearings.

And the Left's form of justice is never satisfied. You think it will stop at a T&R commission on race? MSNBC's Chris Hayes tweeted this month about the need for a commission to deal with Americans who are skeptical about wearing masks:

Or what about a Truth commission on religion? I mean, look at those reckless churches spreading Covid this year. Or this would be a big one – a T&R commission on climate change deniers.

The Left is highly selective when it comes to truth. That's why they are the very last group you want in charge of anything with "Truth and Reconciliation" in the title.

This is one of the most incredibly frustrating things about the Left in America today. The Left insists there is no such thing as absolute truth, while simultaneously insisting there are certain approved truths that are undeniable.

So, you can't question "Science" – even though that's pretty much what every great scientist in history did.

You can't question racism as the explanation for all of existence – because, well, just because.

You can't question third-party "Fact-checkers" – because the powers that be, mainly Big Tech right now, have decided they are the Truth referees and you have to trust what they say because they're using certified external fact-checkers. They just forgot to tell you that they actually fund these third-party fact-checkers. It's like if McDonald's told you to trust third-party health inspectors that they were paying for.

The Left thinks it has a monopoly on Truth. They're the enlightened ones, because they've had the correct instruction, they're privy to the actual facts. It's psychotic arrogance. If you don't buy what they're selling, even if you're just skeptical of it, it's because you either don't have the facts, you willingly deny the facts, or you're simply incapable of grasping the truth because you're blinded by your raging racism problem. It's most likely the racism problem.

The Left never learns from its own preaching. For the past 60-plus years they've decried the House Un-American Activities Committee for trying to root out communists, getting people canceled, ruining Hollywood careers, etcetera. But a HUAC-type committee is precisely what Robert Reich is describing and many on the Left want. It's not enough for Trump to be voted out of office. Americans who helped put him there must be punished. They don't want reconciliation, they want retribution. Because the Left doesn't simply loathe Donald Trump, the Left loathes YOU.

President Donald Trump's performance at last night's final presidential debate was "brilliant" and "the best he's ever done," Glenn Beck said on the radio program Friday.

Glenn described the moments he thought President Trump came across as "sincere," "kind," and "well-informed," as well as Joe Biden's biggest downfalls for of the night — from his big statement on wanting to eliminate the oil industry to his unsurprising gaffes as the debate neared the end. But, the question remains: was Trump's "brilliant performance" enough to win the election?

Watch the video be low to get Glenn's take on the final debate before the November 3 election:


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.