Glenn Beck: Sarah Palin on Oprah


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

Glenn: Let's start with let's start with Sarah Palin. Shall we? Can we start a little Sarah Palin and Sarah Palin on Oprah yesterday. Who saw it? Did anybody watch it? You saw it. Stu is a little Stu said that the audience was unbelievably, what would you

Pat: Noncommittal.

Stu: Cold. If you've ever watched an Oprah Winfrey program, one of the distinctive characteristics of the program is whenever any woman says anything, they go crazy, like it's the greatest thing they've ever heard.

Glenn: I heard that. I heard that.

Pat: Foot rot.

Glenn: Yeah. So, they are a little mindless in their, you know, praising of people.

Stu: Yeah. They love their Oprah and when Oprah seems to like something, they love what she likes.

Pat: Sure.

Stu: And that's okay. You're a fan of the program. Certainly.

Glenn: Like minded people.

Stu: And I did not get that sense, that the audience was as fond of Sarah Palin than they were of

Glenn: It's Sarah Palin. I said, it's Sarah Palin. She's got foot rot.

Stu: So, it was not many times I kind of expected the audience to really I mean, you know this is obviously they're not talking about deep policy here. This is Oprah. They're talking about her family, children, tough decisions that have been made inside the family with pregnancies and

Glenn: Things they would normally applaud, though.

Stu: Oh. Yeah. This is the stuff this audience is there for and they did not seem to be overly warm to Mrs. Palin.

Glenn: I have not, I have not read Mrs. Palin's book yet and I you know, I wonder, we have an interview scheduled with her and I'm wondering if I just wait on the interview because I've seen her everywhere and you kind of get, you know everybody's doing the same kind of thing right now and it's

Pat: Like chicken man, he's everywhere, he's everywhere. That was just me.

Stu: Is that a reference or

Pat: Yeah.

Stu: It's like Dick Orton.

Glenn: So, she's everywhere and I really want you know, Rush Limbaugh said that this is book is what did he say? the most

Pat: Substantive book, one of the most he's ever read.

Glenn: That's significant.

Pat: Yeah, it's big.

Stu: Obviously I haven't read it yet, either. It came out today, but I don't know. That's not the way they're treating it in the media by any means. But it is not also not surprising they would treat it that way.

Pat: I have thumbed through it and it seems like a lot of very interesting stuff. It seems like a lot of stuff that happened during the campaign, etc., etc., but I only saw one chapter that seemed to be really about policy.

Stu: Well, it could be they're really good policies. It might not necessarily be the biggest policy book of all time but my guess is her policies are probably right. They're probably good policies because that seems to be what she supports, at least from our perspective. So, I would not be surprised at all on that.

Glenn: I saw a little bit of the Oprah thing yesterday. You know, the thing that I think makes her look because I'm trying to think, okay, how is it that she looks stupid?

Pat: I don't know.

Glenn: Well, I do in some ways. She looks stupid in the old interviews that she did and I think it's completely acceptable to be this way, unless you're a national public figure. You look stupid when you don't know who you're dealing with.

Stu: She sort of said that in the interview.

Pat: She did and we have that if you want to hear where Oprah asked her you know, she said, you had kind of a rough time.

Glenn: Yeah. Play this. Play this.

Oprah: Why don't you just name some books or magazines?

Palin: Well, obviously I have all my life read. I'm a lover of books and magazines and newspapers. By the time she asked me that question, even though it was kind of early on in the interview, I was already so annoyed and it was very unprofessional of me to wear that annoyance on my sleeve, but

Oprah: You couldn't think of any at the moment or

Palin: No. I was, like, are you kidding me? It seemed like it was in the contain text of do you need, it seemed like she was asking me how do you stay in touch with the real world? That's how I took the question. So, I kind of well, didn't kind. I did. I rolled my eyes and was annoyed with the question and thought, you know, I think that this is a problem with the state of journalism today is no matter what I say to her, it will probably be twisted, perceived as a bit negative.

Glenn: Okay. Stop for a second. I completely understand that and I don't think anybody who I didn't even understand that a year ago. In the last year, I began to understand who I'm dealing with and who you're dealing with in the media. You don't know what the game is like. When can we talk about what happened last week? Is that a couple of weeks?

Stu: Yeah, a couple of weeks. Still a couple of weeks ago.

Glenn: There's something that happened last week and we'll talk about it in a couple of weeks, but I'm just by something and I can't say anything, that I was so absolutely on guard and I realized halfway through, I could have such a great conversation with this person if we weren't playing gotcha and that's all that's played is gotcha. They're going to ask you this simple question and so when you're in this interview, you don't you can't even imagine. America, you just can't imagine. You're like I am. You trust people. You trust people to be decent because everybody you know is decent. You may not agree with them, but they're decent. They're fair. You would expect journalists to be fire. They're not. They're not. They come into the interview knowing exactly who you are and I'm going to get them. I'm going to be the one that gets them. And so they strategize in their head. I'm going to ask this question first, then I'm going to ask this question, then I'm going to ask this one, because if you ask this one first, if he answers it this way, Oh, oh, when I get to the third question do you know what I mean? So, you have to in your head quickly assess what is the real intent behind this question. Well, you look stupid when you first get into it because you don't know that's the game they're playing because you've never played New York journalist hard ball. It ain't nice. It's not pretty. It is who's a better games man. That's all it is. It's not even about the truth. It's who can destroy whom. Who is going can you, as a presidential candidate, hold that person at bay, can you do this is what Sarah Palin did to David Letterman. She taught the media a lesson. Now, the media's not going to go out and make jokes about her daughter, but that's not the lesson. The lesson was, Really? You think you can get me? Me, personally? I don't think David Letterman's intent was to say that her young daughter was, you know, going out, you know, and having sex at 14. Maybe it was. Maybe it was.

Stu: It's a good argument to be made for that. David Letterman's not really the one to be looking into those kinds of things.

Glenn: It could be, but when I first heard that, I didn't take it, but when I heard Sarah Palin's response, I didn't say good for you. I did this: (Indicating.) Oh, my gosh. Don't mess with that woman, because what she did was she took now, maybe it was honest, but I've become jaded. Maybe it was completely honest that David Letterman meant it that way and she took it that way, but there's an equal, if not greater chance, that David Letterman didn't mean it that way but Sarah Palin had had enough and she wanted to send a message to all of the media, don't screw with me. You think I'm a little hick? Really? Watch how I destroy David Letterman and take this little funny thing that he just did and rub his nose in it. That's what she's done. Now, that's what interviews in New York are all about. If you're a presidential candidate, you've got to show them, don't screw with me. Really? You want ask me that question, Katie? I've got a question for you or I've got a response and maybe that response doesn't ever make it to air. But that response, Katie Couric never forgets. That response she tells her friends, don't screw with him. Don't screw with her. You do it once on the air or you do it like David Letterman, like she did to David Letterman, and you've taught them she's sharp enough cut your throat and you won't even see it coming.

Stu: This is a great point you're making of imagine what the media could be if that wasn't the game.

Glenn: Exactly right. Imagine the truth you could get to if they didn't you know, Al Sharpton said to me one time, the first time I interviewed Al Sharpton, he looked down at my notes and he said, you handwrite your notes out or somebody handwrites your notes? And I said, somebody handwrites my note? No. I handwrote my notes out. And he said, you write your own questions? That was such a bizarre question to me. And I said, yeah. Doesn't everybody? He said, no. They're usually not that curious. Somebody else writes the questions for most hosts, not all. The good ones, they write, but most hosts that are on television, the questions are in the prompter or they're just on a sheet, ask this guest this question. Okay? They already know the response. They already know the questions and the really you know, the people like Katie Couric or Oprah Winfrey, those questions are designed in a committee. They're designed by a group. This is an important interview. There's a group of people saying these are the questions you've got to ask. These are the questions that we think you can ask and you can get this kind of a response. These are the questions that will either destroy this person or put you on the map or in their dream of dreams, both. Put you on the map for destroying this person. So, Sarah Palin looked stupid to a lot of people when she first came out because she had never played that game. I have to tell you, I'm still at the in the learning curve of that game. Just so the media knows, I'm not the guy I was six months ago. Go ahead, brother. Go ahead. I'm not so naive, I don't trust people taking my picture anymore. We just turned down a deal with People magazine. They wanted to do a big spread because they wouldn't let us use our photographer. Well, what we're people magazine. We're going to use our really? I've been burned by a photographer before, one that I looked into her eyes and said, look. I'm willing to make fun of me, I'm willing to do stuff, I'm willing just, please, I'm a human being. I'm a dad. Don't do anything do what you say you're going to do with these pictures. Oh, my gosh. Absolutely. Of course. She lied to my face, looked me in the eye. I talked to her human being to human being, an artist that is supposed to be able to connect with the human soul. Nothing. Dead inside. I don't nobody takes my photo, nobody takes my photo. George Lang is the only guy that will ever take my photo, period. You want a photo of me, talk to George Lang because I can actually be myself, I can be crazy, risky, you know, somber, whatever it is, I can be who I am and I know he will never violate my trust on those pictures. That's, unfortunately, the world you have to live in. Now, second thing that I think makes Sarah Palin look kind of stupid, you know, people will say, oh, she's stupid. It's in a damn Minnesota accent that I know she never lived in Minnesota, that accent drives me crazy.

Critical Race Theory: A special brand of evil

wal_172619/Pixabay

Part of what makes it hard for us to challenge the left is that their beliefs are complicated. We don't mean complicated in a positive way. They aren't complicated the way love is complicated. They're complicated because there's no good explanation for them, no basis in reality.

The left cannot pull their heads out of the clouds. They are stuck on romantic ideas, abstract ideas, universal ideas. They talk in theories. They see the world through ideologies. They cannot divorce themselves from their own academic fixations. And — contrary to what they believe and how they act — it's not because leftists are smarter than the rest of us. And studies have repeatedly shown that leftists are the least happy people in the country. Marx was no different. The Communist Manifesto talks about how the rise of cities "rescued a considerable part of the population from the idiocy of rural life."

Studies have repeatedly shown that leftists are the least happy people in the country.

Instead of admitting that they're pathological hypocrites, they tell us that we're dumb and tell us to educate ourselves. Okay, so we educate ourselves; we return with a coherent argument. Then they say, "Well, you can't actually understand what you just said unless you understand the work of this other obscure Marxist writer. So educate yourselves more."

It's basically the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, the idea that when you point out a flaw in someone's argument, they say, "Well, that's a bad example."

After a while, it becomes obvious that there is no final destination for their bread-crumb trail. Everything they say is based on something that somebody else said, which is based on something somebody else said.

Take critical race theory. We're sure you've noticed by now that it is not evidence-based — at all. It is not, as academics say, a quantitative method. It doesn't use objective facts and data to arrive at conclusions. Probably because most of those conclusions don't have any basis in reality.

Critical race theory is based on feelings. These feelings are based on theories that are also based on feelings.

We wanted to trace the history of critical race theory back to the point where its special brand of evil began. What allowed it to become the toxic, racist monster that it is today?

Later, we'll tell you about some of the snobs who created critical theory, which laid the groundwork for CRT. But if you follow the bread-crumb trail from their ideas, you wind up with Marxism.

For years, the staff has devoted a lot of time to researching Marxism. We have read a lot of Marx and Marxist writing. It's part of our promise to you to be as informed as possible, so that you know where to go for answers; so that you know what to say when your back is up against the wall. What happens when we take the bread-crumb trail back farther, past Marxism? What is it based on?

This is the point where Marxism became Marxism and not just extra-angry socialism.

It's actually based on the work of one of the most important philosophers in human history, a 19th-century German philosopher named Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel.

This is the point where Marxism became Marxism and not just extra-angry socialism. And, as you'll see in just a bit, if we look at Hegel's actual ideas, it's obvious that Marx completely misrepresented them in order to confirm his own fantasies.

So, in a way, that's where the bread-crumb trail ends: With Marx's misrepresentation of an incredibly important, incredibly useful philosophy, a philosophy that's actually pretty conservative.

We've heard a lot about critical race theory lately, and for good reason: It's a racist ideology designed to corrupt our children and undermine our American values. But most of what we see are the results of a process that has been underway for decades. And that's not something the mainstream media, the Democrat Party, and even teachers unions want you to know. They're doing everything in their power to try and convince you that it's no big deal. They want to sweep everything under the rug and keep you in the dark. To fight it, we need to understand what fuels it.

On his Wednesday night special this week, Glenn Beck exposes the deep-seated Marxist origins of CRT and debunks the claims that it's just a harmless term for a school of legal scholarship. Newsweek opinion editor Josh Hammer joins to argue why we must ban critical race theory from our schools if we want to save a very divided nation.

Watch the full "Glenn TV" episode below:

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.

On the radio program Monday, Glenn Beck blasted the Democrats — and anyone else on the left — who have been so eager to open our southern U.S. border for the past several months, but also willing to turn a blind eye to the Cuban people in need of help today.

"While we are welcoming people from any country, all over the world, without any kind of information, and setting them into our country, putting them on American planes paid for by American taxpayers," Glenn began. "And our Coast Guard Cutters are turning these [Cuban] people away. Shame on you! Shame on you!"

Glenn said that he's "sick and tired" of hearing about "brave" leftist activists like Colin Kaepernick, who protest the America flag while wearing Che Guevara and Fidel Castro t-shirts. Meanwhile, the Cuban people are risking their lives by taking to the sea to escape their oppressive regime and come to America.

"Anybody who glorifies Che doesn't know their ass from their elbow. You can't call them a human rights activist. You're protesting the American flag, because you so deeply believe in the right to be free? And yet, you wear a Che T-shirt?" Glenn said.

Glenn went on to argue that, even though the left has "bastardized" the meaning of our country, he still believes America is the best nation on Earth. In fact, he'd give up his citizenship "in a heartbeat" if another country could prove to be better, more noble, and more free. But no other nation exists like ours, he said, which is why it's so imperative we fight for freedom here, in Cuba, and around the world.

Watch the video clip below to hear Glenn explain:

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.

There's a new "reality" spreading, and the mere act of questioning it has become incredibly dangerous, Wall Street Journal investigative journalist Abigail Shrier told Glenn on the most recent episode of "The Glenn Beck Podcast."

Shrier's book, "Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters," exposes the radical gender activism that — like critical race theory — has overtaken our children's schools and culture. But even worse, she warned, it could end your parental rights for good.

Shrier made it clear she is by no means "anti-trans," but simply speaking up against the extremes of this new "reality" has made her enemy No. 1 to many activists. Her book has been bashed so hard by the Left that Target has stopped selling it twice, Amazon once banned ads for it, and the American Booksellers Association even called sending it to others "a serious, violent incident."

In the clip below, Shrier explained why she believes "there may be no hope for the public school system."

"You have teachers behaving like activists across the country who have no interest in actually teaching. They believe their job is to remake your child," she asserted. "We're seeing so much evidence of that, I think it's fair to say that it may be too deeply rooted in the ideology being taught in public school. I'm not sure that the public school system is redeemable at this point."

Watch the video clip below for more or find the full podcast with Abigail Shrier 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.