Glenn Beck: Do you recognize America?


Feedback: Add to the list...




Glenn came up with a list of things that if he told you a year ago, you would never believe they'd ever come to fruition. The list is staggering, but it's only a partial list because it's what Glenn, Stu and Pat came up with just chatting in the office this morning. Listen to the list Glenn produced and help add to it by sending us any glaring omissions using the form below...

 


GLENN: From high above Times Square, Midtown Manhattan, third most listened to show in all of America. Hello, you sick twisted freak. Welcome to the program. My name is Glenn Beck. I'm glad you're here. I'm going to speak in code here for a second because this is going to be a message to an audience of one, an entity of one. I have a contract for a private party. That private party is going to be broadcast tonight. If my First Amendment rights, if my contract is violated in any way, shape or form, I'll spend every damn dime I have to make sure everybody understands the game that's being played. There's some interesting games that I will share with you gladly. In the meantime make sure you join us tonight in movie theatres for the road to redemption. Yes, a Christmas message. If any, if anything happens to me, just understand all involved will be exposed. Gladly. With glee. Christmas joy in my heart.

Now, hello, America. How are you? It is an interesting world we're living in. It's interesting that I started the broadcast with that today as one of the things I want to talk to you about is I said a year ago ‑‑ was it a year ago today or yesterday? When was it, Stu, that I said ‑‑ it was about a year ago. It just came up on ‑‑

PAT: I think it was a year ago today.

GLENN: Just came up on Stu's calendar. I said it was at this time that I said a year from now, by Christmas, you will not recognize this country. And we were talking about it this morning. And Stu said, I don't know. I mean, I don't know if that's right.

PAT: The buildings look about the same, the freeway on ramps are exactly where they used to be.

GLENN: That's exactly right.

PAT: They're still crowded on most of the major thoroughfares.

GLENN: I started making a list, just rattling off a list of the things that if I would have told you were happening in this country a year ago, there's no way you would have believed, no way. Not a chance. We'll give you that list, and I'd like you to help me add to that list. Do we have the list now? We're just printing it out because I ‑‑ I just rattled off the list. Oh, it's how many? One, one, two, three, four, five, six pages. That's it, though. It's only six pages, okay? And this is just off the top of our heads. You ready?

Won't recognize the country a year ago, you will not recognize America a year from now. Ready? If I would have told you last year at this time that the government would own General Motors, Chrysler, and many of the banks and financial institutions and AIG, that they would fire the CEOs, that they would threaten the banks, that they would shut them down unless they would take that money, that they would hire good people for places like AIG and pay them a dollar to fix the problem, a dollar a year, these people would volunteer; but they would also promise them, the government would, that they would promise them bonuses if they would just work for that dollar a year to fix the problem. When that year came up, they would not only give them that bonus, they would vilify them, send their minions out to protest in front of their homes for even wanting the bonus that they were asked, that they were promised by the government and then people in Washington would then set out to have a specific tax drawn up just for those people, would you have believed it?

PAT: I don't think so.

GLENN: Not only would they take over GM and fire the first guy, the president would fire a CEO but then the second individual that they put in place of the first guy, he would be fired and the guy they replaced, this is the third now person under Barack Obama's term, the third CEO of General Motors. No one in the media would report that that guy is the man who helped Rahm Emanuel make $16 million in one deal.

If I told you a year ago, which I did, you won't recognize the country, you will not recognize America a year from now, I said that a year ago; if I told you instead that there would be a 9/11 Truther, a guy who said the United States government blew up those buildings, a self‑avowed communist, a guy who, a guy who is speaking in prison anticop, who defended a guy who point blank shot a cop in the head, if I said he would be a high level advisor to the president of the United States, would you believe it? If I said the president would come out in a speech and say I have absolutely no information but the cops acted stupidly because they caught a friend of the president appearing to break into his own home, the cops didn't act stupidly, they just did their job and the president would never apologize, instead he would invite them all for a beer summit and use it as a learning experience about diversity, would you believe it? If I would have told you instead of saying you won't recognize this country a year from now, if I instead told you I'm going to be on the cover of Time magazine, would you have believed it? That I'm going to be one of the ten most fascinating people in 2009, you've got to ask yourself what the hell happened to this country. If I would have told you instead that the most frequent visitor of the White House, over the Secretary of State and everybody else, is a labor union president who has repeatedly said workers of the world unite; and we know we've got a lot of illegal members, illegal aliens in our membership, and who chief guy said, yeah, but we also represent American workers, end quote, that he would be the most frequent visitor at the White House, would you have believed it? That the president of the EU would say that 2009 was the year of establishing a global government through the EU and that the climate change treaty would be the next step in one world government, that there would be a call for the end of the dollar as the world's reserve currency by several massive countries and that the leader of Russia would hold up a coin in front of the cameras and say here's a prototype of the new global currency, that in government‑structured bailouts, bondholders would lose their legal status and their investments in favor of labor union payoffs and the courts would say, "Hmmm, yeah, okay." That you could lose your home and property through eminent domain and eminent domain would expand in staggering ways. That California would decide to levy a 10% tax on its people and insist it's not a tax; it's just a forced loan. That they would issue IOUs instead of tax refunds. That New York would say by the end of the year they would be broke. That New York would issue retroactive taxes, that a tax fund for the poorest of Americans would not really be a tax refund. Instead those poorest of Americans would find out many months later that they had to pay income tax on that tax refund. If I told you that the symbol of capitalism, the Empire State building, would be lit in colors of communist China, would you have believed me? That the hockey stick chart would be discredited as would its founder along with another leader of the global climate change movement who manipulated data, that they deleted e‑mails and information to avoid Freedom of Information Act, that these same scientists would do everything they could to discredit the peer review process to make sure it remained pure for their ideological purposes, and yet the media wouldn't report on it and we'd still be headed to Copenhagen with a president the who was going to present a 17% reduction in carbon. For our country, that our science czar, John Holdren, our science czar would be someone who called for forced abortions and sterilization through the drinking water, who said that the redistribution of wealth would be necessary and it would happen through the environmental movement. That the diversity czar at the FCC, if I just told you a year ago there would be a diversity czar at the FCC, would you have believed me? That the diversity czar at the FCC would say Americans have to decide soon which Americans would have to step down from their positions in order to give others a chance, that this same man said the revolution in Venezuela was incredible and that we should model our FCC and our programs after Venezuela and the revolution. That the U.S. would have a two‑day summit to discuss the role of government in journalism and be discussing a government takeover of journalism and that no journalist would actually report on that. That they would hold a job summit and not invite the Chamber of Commerce, that two uninvited people could get into the White House state dinner, chat with the president, be near the prime minister of the largest democracy on the planet and that the response from the White House would be, yeah, we need to do a better job with security. That a U.S. congressman would tell the American people that it's unreasonable to expect people in congress to read bills, and he would say that because our congress would pass two bills over 1,000 pages, that no one in congress had read. One of them was over 2,000 pages. That a job creating stimulus bill would be written, not read by congress but not even written by congress. It would be co‑written by the Apollo Alliance, a special interest group whose New York chief was a co‑founder of the Weather Underground and no one would care! That people in congress would openly be praising Castro, Chavez, that the president would receive an ‑‑ if I said to you a year ago, "You know what's going to happen next year: The president is going to receive an anti‑American book and a photo op from Hugo Chavez and then he would have a one‑hour private meeting with Vladimir Putin where Vladimir Putin, quoting, would teach the president the history of the Cold War. That our president would give an iPod of his speeches to the queen of England. That he would send the bust of Winston Churchill, which was a gift from the people of England; when the prime minister came over that our president would say to him, hey, by the way attention thanks, but you can take this back to him now and the prime minister would say to him, no, no, no, that was a gift from the people of England to you and you can keep it in one of your museums; we gave it to you on September 11th. No, no, that's okay, and box it up and ship it back!

If I told you that there would be hundreds of thousands of Americans gathered in a true grassroots event in a National Mall in D.C. and the media would not only dismiss them but the government, the president and the media would deem them a danger to the United States, that healthcare would be at 36% approval rating, which is lower than Hillary Care but that those in congress and the White House would still be jamming it down your throats. That the chief of the treasury who oversees the IRS cheated on his taxes as would almost everyone else in the cabinet. If I told you a year ago when gold was about $800 an ounce that it would be at $1200 an ounce, would you have believed it? That Dubai which a year ago was bailing out our banks would be on the edge of bankruptcy. If I told you we're going to lose 4 million jobs and the media would report that the White House has created or saved a million jobs even though in their evidence you have to find their evidence on a $20 million redesigned website where it would show that a good portion of these jobs were in about 400 districts that don't even exist. If I told you that, would you have believed it? Looking at that list, do you recognize the country that you live in? Is this the same country that you lived in a year ago today? I don't think so. I don't recognize it. If I would have told you that there would be a Muslim terrorist and that he would shoot and killed soldiers at Fort Hood, would you have believed it? If I told you then that, yes, the president will make a statement but he will spend two minutes prior to giving a shoutout and talking about the conference he had with the American Indian, would you have believed it? If I then told you after that two minutes he would then say then, oh, and also there's been a shooting of our military but let's not jump to conclusions. And then his Homeland Security director would be over in the Middle East and she would say, don't worry, we're working on things to stop the violence against Muslims in America, would you have believed it?

I can be wrong on an awful lot of things and I have been wrong on an awful lot of things. But when will people in this country, when will the media at least say, gosh, it looks like the direction of our country and the one this guy keeps laying out, gee, some of those things seem to be happening. When will anyone in the media even notice how far we have come?

From the moment the 33-year-old Thomas Jefferson arrived at the Continental Congress in Philadelphia in 1776, he was on the radical side. That caused John Adams to like him immediately. Then the Congress stuck Jefferson and Adams together on the five-man committee to write a formal statement justifying a break with Great Britain, and their mutual admiration society began.

Jefferson thought Adams should write the Declaration. But Adams protested, saying, “It can't come from me because I'm obnoxious and disliked." Adams reasoned that Jefferson was not obnoxious or disliked, therefore he should write it. Plus, he flattered Jefferson, by telling him he was a great writer. It was a master class in passing the buck.

So, over the next 17 days, Jefferson holed up in his room, applying his lawyer skills to the ideas of the Enlightenment. He borrowed freely from existing documents like the Virginia Declaration of Rights. He later wrote that “he was not striving for originality of principle or sentiment." Instead, he hoped his words served as “an expression of the American mind."

It's safe to say he achieved his goal.

The five-man committee changed about 25 percent of Jefferson's first draft of the Declaration before submitting it to Congress. Then, Congress altered about one-fifth of that draft. But most of the final Declaration's words are Jefferson's, including the most famous passage — the Preamble — which Congress left intact. The result is nothing less than America's mission statement, the words that ultimately bind the nation together. And words that we desperately need to rediscover because of our boiling partisan rage.

The Declaration is brilliant in structure and purpose. It was designed for multiple audiences: the King of Great Britain, the colonists, and the world. And it was designed for multiple purposes: rallying the troops, gaining foreign allies, and announcing the creation of a new country.

The Declaration is structured in five sections: the Introduction, Preamble, the Body composed of two parts, and the Conclusion. It's basically the most genius breakup letter ever written.

In the Introduction, step 1 is the notificationI think we need to break up. And to be fair, I feel I owe you an explanation...

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another…

The Continental Congress felt they were entitled by “the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" to “dissolve the political bands," but they needed to prove the legitimacy of their cause. They were defying the world's most powerful nation and needed to motivate foreign allies to join the effort. So, they set their struggle within the entire “Course of human events." They're saying, this is no petty political spat — this is a major event in world history.

Step 2 is declaring what you believe in, your standardsHere's what I'm looking for in a healthy relationship...

This is the most famous part of the Declaration; the part school children recite — the Preamble:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That's as much as many Americans know of the Declaration. But the Preamble is the DNA of our nation, and it really needs to be taken as a whole:

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

The Preamble takes us through a logical progression: All men are created equal; God gives all humans certain inherent rights that cannot be denied; these include the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; to protect those rights, we have governments set up; but when a government fails to protect our inherent rights, people have the right to change or replace it.

Government is only there to protect the rights of mankind. They don't have any power unless we give it to them. That was an extraordinarily radical concept then and we're drifting away from it now.

The Preamble is the justification for revolution. But note how they don't mention Great Britain yet. And again, note how they frame it within a universal context. These are fundamental principles, not just squabbling between neighbors. These are the principles that make the Declaration just as relevant today. It's not just a dusty parchment that applied in 1776.

Step 3 is laying out your caseHere's why things didn't work out between us. It's not me, it's you...

This is Part 1 of the Body of the Declaration. It's the section where Jefferson gets to flex his lawyer muscles by listing 27 grievances against the British crown. This is the specific proof of their right to rebellion:

He has obstructed the administration of justice...

For imposing taxes on us without our consent...

For suspending our own legislatures...

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us...

Again, Congress presented these “causes which impel them to separation" in universal terms to appeal to an international audience. It's like they were saying, by joining our fight you'll be joining mankind's overall fight against tyranny.

Step 4 is demonstrating the actions you took I really tried to make this relationship work, and here's how...

This is Part 2 of the Body. It explains how the colonists attempted to plead their case directly to the British people, only to have the door slammed in their face:

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury...

They too have been deaf to the voice of justice... We must, therefore... hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

This basically wrapped up America's argument for independence — we haven't been treated justly, we tried to talk to you about it, but since you refuse to listen and things are only getting worse, we're done here.

Step 5 is stating your intent — So, I think it's best if we go our separate ways. And my decision is final...

This is the powerful Conclusion. If people know any part of the Declaration besides the Preamble, this is it:

...that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved...

They left no room for doubt. The relationship was over, and America was going to reboot, on its own, with all the rights of an independent nation.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The message was clear — this was no pitchfork mob. These were serious men who had carefully thought through the issues before taking action. They were putting everything on the line for this cause.

The Declaration of Independence is a landmark in the history of democracy because it was the first formal statement of a people announcing their right to choose their own government. That seems so obvious to us now, but in 1776 it was radical and unprecedented.

In 1825, Jefferson wrote that the purpose of the Declaration was “not to find out new principles, or new arguments, never before thought of… but to place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm… to justify ourselves in the independent stand we are compelled to take."

You're not going to do better than the Declaration of Independence. Sure, it worked as a means of breaking away from Great Britain, but its genius is that its principles of equality, inherent rights, and self-government work for all time — as long as we actually know and pursue those principles.

On June 7, 1776, the Second Continental Congress met in Philadelphia at the Pennsylvania State House, better known today as Independence Hall. Virginia delegate Richard Henry Lee introduced a motion calling for the colonies' independence. The “Lee Resolution" was short and sweet:

Resolved, That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved.

Intense debate followed, and the Congress voted 7 to 5 (with New York abstaining) to postpone a vote on Lee's Resolution. They called a recess for three weeks. In the meantime, the delegates felt they needed to explain what they were doing in writing. So, before the recess, they appointed a five-man committee to come up with a formal statement justifying a break with Great Britain. They appointed two men from New England — Roger Sherman and John Adams; two from the middle colonies — Robert Livingston and Benjamin Franklin; and one Southerner — Thomas Jefferson. The responsibility for writing what would become the Declaration of Independence fell to Jefferson.

In the rotunda of the National Archives building in Washington, D.C., there are three original documents on permanent display: the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence. These are the three pillars of the United States, yet America barely seems to know them anymore. We need to get reacquainted — quickly.

In a letter to his friend John Adams in 1816, Jefferson wrote: “I like the dreams of the future, better than the history of the past."

America used to be a forward-looking nation of dreamers. We still are in spots, but the national attitude that we hear broadcast loudest across media is not looking toward the future with optimism and hope. In late 2017, a national poll found 59% of Americans think we are currently at the “lowest point in our nation's history that they can remember."

America spends far too much time looking to the past for blame and excuse. And let's be honest, even the Right is often more concerned with “owning the left" than helping point anyone toward the practical principles of the Declaration of Independence. America has clearly lost touch with who we are as a nation. We have a national identity crisis.

The Declaration of Independence is America's thesis statement, and without it America doesn't exist.

It is urgent that we get reacquainted with the Declaration of Independence because postmodernism would have us believe that we've evolved beyond the America of our founding documents, and thus they're irrelevant to the present and the future. But the Declaration of Independence is America's thesis statement, and without it America doesn't exist.

Today, much of the nation is so addicted to partisan indignation that "day-to-day" indignation isn't enough to feed the addiction. So, we're reaching into America's past to help us get our fix. In 2016, Democrats in the Louisiana state legislature tabled a bill that would have required fourth through sixth graders to recite the opening lines of the Declaration. They didn't table it because they thought it would be too difficult or too patriotic. They tabled it because the requirement would include the phrase “all men are created equal" and the progressives in the Louisiana legislature didn't want the children to have to recite a lie. Representative Barbara Norton said, “One thing that I do know is, all men are not created equal. When I think back in 1776, July the fourth, African Americans were slaves. And for you to bring a bill to request that our children will recite the Declaration, I think it's a little bit unfair to us. To ask our children to recite something that's not the truth. And for you to ask those children to repeat the Declaration stating that all men's are free. I think that's unfair."

Remarkable — an elected representative saying it wouldn't be fair for students to have to recite the Declaration because “all men are not created equal." Another Louisiana Democrat explained that the government born out of the Declaration “was used against races of people." I guess they missed that part in school where they might have learned that the same government later made slavery illegal and amended the Constitution to guarantee all men equal protection under the law. The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments were an admission of guilt by the nation regarding slavery, and an effort to right the wrongs.

Yet, the progressive logic goes something like this: many of the men who signed the Declaration of Independence, including Thomas Jefferson who wrote it, owned slaves; slavery is evil; therefore, the Declaration of Independence is not valid because it was created by evil slave owners.

It's a sad reality that the left has a very hard time appreciating the universal merits of the Declaration of Independence because they're so hung up on the long-dead issue of slavery. And just to be clear — because people love to take things out of context — of course slavery was horrible. Yes, it is a total stain on our history. But defending the Declaration of Independence is not an effort to excuse any aspect of slavery.

Okay then, people might say, how could the Founders approve the phrase “All men are created equal," when many of them owned slaves? How did they miss that?

They didn't miss it. In fact, Thomas Jefferson included an anti-slavery passage in his first draft of the Declaration. The paragraph blasted King George for condoning slavery and preventing the American Colonies from passing legislation to ban slavery:

He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights to life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating and carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere... Determined to keep open a market where men should be bought and sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce.

We don't say “execrable" that much anymore. It means, utterly detestable, abominable, abhorrent — basically very bad.

Jefferson was upset when Georgia and North Carolina threw up the biggest resistance to that paragraph. Ultimately, those two states twisted Congress' arm to delete the paragraph.

Still, how could a man calling the slave trade “execrable" be a slaveowner himself? No doubt about it, Jefferson was a flawed human being. He even had slaves from his estate in Virginia attending him while he was in Philadelphia, in the very apartment where he was writing the Declaration.

Many of the Southern Founders deeply believed in the principles of the Declaration yet couldn't bring themselves to upend the basis of their livelihood. By 1806, Virginia law made it more difficult for slave owners to free their slaves, especially if the owner had significant debts as Jefferson did.

At the same time, the Founders were not idiots. They understood the ramifications of signing on to the principles described so eloquently in the Declaration. They understood that logically, slavery would eventually have to be abolished in America because it was unjust, and the words they were committing to paper said as much. Remember, John Adams was on the committee of five that worked on the Declaration and he later said that the Revolution would never be complete until the slaves were free.

Also, the same generation that signed the Declaration started the process of abolition by banning the importation of slaves in 1807. Jefferson was President at the time and he urged Congress to pass the law.

America has an obvious road map that, as a nation, we're not consulting often enough.

The Declaration took a major step toward crippling the institution of slavery. It made the argument for the first time about the fundamental rights of all humans which completely undermined slavery. Planting the seeds to end slavery is not nearly commendable enough for leftist critics, but you can't discount the fact that the seeds were planted. It's like they started an expiration clock for slavery by approving the Declaration. Everything that happened almost a century later to end slavery, and then a century after that with the Civil Rights movement, flowed from the principles voiced in the Declaration.

Ironically for a movement that calls itself progressive, it is obsessed with retrying and judging the past over and over. Progressives consider this a better use of time than actually putting past abuses in the rearview and striving not to be defined by ancestral failures.

It can be very constructive to look to the past, but not when it's used to flog each other in the present. Examining history is useful in providing a road map for the future. And America has an obvious road map that, as a nation, we're not consulting often enough. But it's right there, the original, under glass. The ink is fading, but the words won't die — as long as we continue to discuss them.

'Good Morning Texas' gives exclusive preview of Mercury One museum

Screen shot from Good Morning Texas

Mercury One is holding a special exhibition over the 4th of July weekend, using hundreds of artifacts, documents and augmented reality experiences to showcase the history of slavery — including slavery today — and a path forward. Good Morning Texas reporter Paige McCoy Smith went through the exhibit for an exclusive preview with Mercury One's chief operating officer Michael Little on Tuesday.

Watch the video below to see the full preview.

Click here to purchase tickets to the museum (running from July 4 - 7).

Over the weekend, journalist Andy Ngo and several other apparent right-leaning people were brutally beaten by masked-gangs of Antifa protesters in Portland, Oregon. Short for "antifascist," Antifa claims to be fighting for social justice and tolerance — by forcibly and violently silencing anyone with opposing opinions. Ngo, who was kicked, punched, and sprayed with an unknown substance, is currently still in the hospital with a "brain bleed" as a result of the savage attack. Watch the video to get the details from Glenn.