Glenn Beck: The 'Prison Plan' Marches On




Watch


Glenn Beck weekdays at 5p & 2a ET on Fox News Channel

The "Prison Plan" marches on! That's what I'm calling President Obama's health care plan because apparently, that's where it was born: in prison.

On Monday night, I showed you the convicted felon who was welcomed with open arms at the White House state dinner. While everyone was watching the reality TV dopes, no one seemed to notice the presence of Robert Creamer.

And the media, who fell asleep on the job — well, all except Andrew Breitbart from BigGovernment.com and Cliff Kincaid from Accuracy in Media — the rest of the media woke up today outraged at the news.

Reports were everywhere! The White House scrambled. Questions were flying: How could this happen? Who's to blame? How did he get into the White House? What is it with this prison campaign? Yes, that's in the America we used to know — where things mattered.

OK, none of that happened because we are now living in a world where Tiger Woods' mother-in-law going to the hospital is much more important than a convicted felon dining with the president and creating the blueprint to get health care reform done.

We should get this guy a contract with Nike! Well, that won't work: No one is covering him.

No one in the media seems to care that, at the time of the biggest banking crisis in recent history, a felon who went to prison for banking fraud is about to affect one-sixth of the economy.

They had a similar reaction when we first brought up Van Jones; the media only turned on him when it was revealed he was a 9/11 Truther. Radical communist? That's apparently OK.

And it looks like convicted-felon-providing-the-blueprint-for-the-government-overseeing-40-percent-of-our-economy is OK, because no one is reporting on it. Well, almost no one. The lefty bloggers are all upset that I dare call out this crusader for social justice.

Creamer was convicted after being involved in a "check-kiting" scheme. Basically, that's fraud. Creamer conned banks out of over $2 million and yet, the left has stood by (and continues to stand by) him. His well-connected wife, Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky — you remember her, right? She's the one who famously said this about government-run health care:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JAN SCHAKOWSKY, D-ILL.: A public option will put the private insurance industry out of business and lead to single-payer.

(APPLAUSE)

My single-payer friends, he was right. The man was right.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

Well, she rallied the big guns for her man when he was in trouble. Creamer received some 200 letters of support during his trial. From luminaries such as Sen. Dick Durbin, Carol Browner, Jesse Jackson and top Obama adviser David Axelrod.

Creamer was so well-connected in Democratic circles that even the judge in the case was considered recusing himself because he was a former Democratic state representative whose son-in-law had worked with Creamer.

He didn't — only in Chicago. Is anyone in Chicago not corrupt? I hate to go back to "The Untouchables," but it seems to be right on the money:

(BEGIN 'THE UNTOUCHABLES' VIDEO CLIP)

ANTHONY MOCKUS SR. AS JUDGE: Bailiff, I want you to switch the juries.

WILL ZAHRN AS DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Your Honor, I object!

JUDGE: Overruled.

CLIFTON JAMES AS DISTRICT ATTORNEY: What did you tell him?

KEVIN COSTNER AS ELIOT NESS: I told him his name was in the ledger too.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

The normal sentence for a similar crime is 30-37 months. Creamer did about half that and 11 months of it was on house arrest. And he was allowed to commute to work. And now he's getting the lifetime achievement award for progressives.

How could this happen? Simple: The ends justify the means. Creamer apologized for his conduct, but claimed just to be overzealous while working for a good cause. The cause?

(BEGIN 2006 VIDEO CLIP)

ROBERT CREAMER: For the rest of my life I will continue to do whatever I can to work for social and economic justice.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

"Social and Economic justice": Those are the magic "get out of jail free or early" cards in the progressive world. You could kill cops and murder convenient store clerks — but if you talk economic justice or write kids books while in prison, you'll have a gaggle of progressives (like Van Jones) lining up to support you.

Creamer claimed he was just so passionate about his "goal" it caused him to break the law to "keep the group" afloat. His attorney practically sainted Creamer in the sentencing memo, saying: "Robert Creamer is an extraordinary individual. He is a remarkably selfless and passionate advocate for the public interest. Moreover, at all times, he eschewed the pursuit of personal wealth, deciding instead to utilize his extraordinary vision and experience to improve the lives and opportunities of countless Americans."

At all times? All, you mean, except for those years and years where Creamer used $2.3 million in fraudulently obtained funds to pay for his six figure salary and stay in his five-bedroom home. Uh, if you were so "selfless" and for the "public interest," wouldn't you work for a little cheaper than $100,000 a year?

And, by the way, I'm sure a tea party member would get the same break in the media and outpouring of support if they were defrauding banks to pay their own six-figure salary "for the cause."

But, if you are a powerful lobbyist, who has worked for the George Soros-funded Open Society Policy Center — like Creamer is — then the rules are a little bit different.

He still went to prison, but used the reduced stint to write a book that is now considered, in progressive circles, as a blueprint for achieving the progressive agenda.

Top Obama economic adviser David Axelrod called Creamer's book a "blueprint" for future progressive victories. Is the administration following the blueprint? I showed you these goals last night — do you think they are following them?

• Create a national consensus that health care is a right

• Create a national consensus that the health care system is in crisis

• Convince political leaders that they owe their elections to the groundswell of support for universal health care face peril if they fail to deliver on health care in 2009

• Need not agree in advance on the components of the plan, but foster a process that can ultimately yield consensus

• Focus especially on the mobilization of the labor movement and the faith community

• Generate emotion: fear, revulsion, anger, disgust

Harry Reid is the latest to follow the last step in the plan — generate emotion: fear, revulsion, anger, disgust" — when he came out and said this Monday about health care reform opponents:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SENATE MAJORITY LEADER HARRY REID, D-NEV.: Instead of joining us on the right side of history, all the Republicans can come up with is: Slow down, stop everything, let's start over. If you think you've heard these same excuses before, you're right. When this country belatedly recognized the wrongs of slavery, there were those who dug in their heels and said slow down; it's too early; let's wait; things aren't bad enough.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

Wow, so opposing health care is the same as opposing the civil rights movement? Thankfully, Harry Reid is one of the worst politicians in history and about as subtle as a baboon, so I doubt this one will catch on. But the intent is clear.

America, our politicians are ignoring you and following a guy who is a thief, a convicted felon. This is a guy who worked and defended Rod Blagojevich — twice! And now David Axelrod calls this "Prison Plan" the "blueprint" for progressives.

Forget the measly $2 million he stole from the banks, he's about to help fraud America on one-sixth of the economy.

This should concern people and the media. Instead it gets shrugged off. Just like when press secretary Gibbs shrugged off the president's tanking approval rating — which is now at 47 percent — when he told reporters: "If I was a heart patient and Gallup was my EKG, I'd visit my doctor... I don't put a lot of stake in, never have, in the EKG that is the daily Gallup trend. I don't pay a lot of attention to meaninglessness."

It's the earliest time a president has fallen to a 47-point approval rating at this stage of the presidency dating back to Truman. And that's the response?

That's exactly the reason the approval is dropping. Because:

• People care that the White House is listening to radical communists, instead of them.

• People care that despite polls showing opposition to nearly every major policy initiative being jammed through, the White House is doing it anyway.

• People care that you are following a convicted felons wishes, than the wishes of the ordinary, hard-working Americans.

By the way, just to give you quick perspective on those polls, Mr. President, if I said, who's the one person the media has made into a joke — oh, they could never be president — it would have to be Sarah Palin.

President Obama, you're now only 1 point away from Sarah Palin. Gee, I wonder if the media will treat you like they've treated her?

— Watch Glenn Beck weekdays at 5p & 2a ET on Fox News Channel

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.