D-Day in Massachusetts

GLENN: But it looks like Brown may be a winner if there's a big turnout today, Brown may be the winner in Massachusetts. Everyone is predicting this. I'm not going to predict anything until it's over. But I will play the game today on what it means and what is coming. Today is the beginning. Assuming that Scott Brown wins. And I want to make this clear as well. Write this one down in your little journal, bloggers. I'm not sure that Scott Brown is a guy that everybody should be celebrating if he wins because I don't really know that much about Scott Brown. I don't know how deep his convictions go. The guy may end up being a progressive for the Republicans. The last thing we need is another Olympia Snowe. Last thing we need is another Lindsey Graham. However, will this stop healthcare? Would I vote for him? I've told you before I'm done voting for, you know, the parties. That is true. However, today if I were a resident in Massachusetts or if I was Ed Schultz and I was just going to go up and vote ten times, if I had to make the decision would I vote for him, the answer is yes. I would. Because I believe Scott Brown may, may give us more time. That's the thing that I pray for every night: Lord, please just give us more time, please. Slow this freight train down. We'll come around. We already are. Look at the progress we have made in the last year. America is waking up. If people have gone up to Massachusetts in the last week, you have seen John Fund from the Wall Street Journal told me this morning, he said, Glenn, I just got back. He said they're practically wearing red coats and blue coats up there. He said it is like the revolution. He said, I've heard more talk about the founding fathers than I ever have at any time. I said, John, this is just the beginning. I expected him to say, really? And he said, oh, I know. America's waking up. We're remembering who we are. Just give us more time.

But I believe starting tomorrow if Brown wins, starting tomorrow is a fulfillment of the, probably the longest running prediction that I have made. Stu, can you see if you can find the audio today of me the night that John Kerry had Michael Moore in the presidential box with Jimmy Carter. Do you remember that?

STU: Yeah, I definitely remember you saying it.

GLENN: Okay. And do you remember what I said?

STU: Yeah. You said, you talked about how you weren't sure which side was controlling who because is it the crazy Michael Moors of the world controlling the Democratic Party or is it because the Democratic Party thinks that they're controlling the crazy Michael Moors of the world.

GLENN: Correct. And I said at the time, warning, Democrats. You think you are using this uber left. I didn't even understand the progressive movement. I didn't even know the history of the progressive movement at the time. You think you are using them because they're out doing crazy things, you know, talking bad about talking junk about George W. Bush. But warning. It's the other way around. They're using you. And at some point they are going to be inside. They are using you as a host and they are going to be inside. And when you try to break away from them, it's going to be the battle of your life. That begins either today or tomorrow. What Americans have not I shouldn't say this. What about 51% of Americans are now getting, because 51% of America is now independent, not Republican or Democrat. What people haven't understood for a very long time and more and more are waking up every day. This is not about the Republicans or the Democrats. This is about the progressives. The progressives see the republic and see the Democratic Party because they were the ones that most embraced, but they are inside the Republican Party as well. They see it as a host, and they're feasting on it. If we were dealing with politics, if this was politics as usual, do you think I would have made an ass out of myself on television, crying up a storm saying, I fear for my country, do you think I would have done that? No. The Republicans survive bad politicians. Republicans survive Democrats. The Republicans survive bad Republicans. It has. It always will. There is an enemy within side that has cloaked itself. It is the progressive movement.

Tonight on television I'm going to show you how the president no longer talks about Democrats. Nobody has noticed it. We've noticed it. We've been saving the audio to play for ya. We'll play it tonight. I want you to see it. He talks about the struggle between the Republicans and the progressives. Not the Democrats. The man is a progressive revolutionary. The Democrats now are going to be in the fight for their live, and I'm either going to be you know, everything that we've discovered together, we're either wrong, and you'll start to know today, or we're right, and you will start to know for sure today. Because here's what's going to happen. If we're dealing with just politicians, if we're dealing with the typical Democrat or the typical Republican, when you lose Massachusetts now, let's put this into perspective. How many Republicans are there in Washington from New England? Anything north of New York? Two?

PAT: I think two: Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins

GLENN: And they are not really

PAT: Yeah. Progressives

GLENN: Yeah. They're progressive Republicans. There's nobody else, not a single Republican. This is Ted Kennedy's seat. Healthcare is at stake. The progressive movement is at stake. This presidency is at stake. If they lose, this is catastrophic for them. This isn't a small little thing. If you lose Ted Kennedy's seat at this time in history on this issue, how are the rest of the Democrats going to fare in the rest of the country? So if you're dealing with Democrats, here's what's going to happen. Democrats are going to say, okay, whoa, whoa, whoa, 1994, we need to triangulate. We need to go back and, you know, we need to be centrists and we need to back off all of these policies. But if they're Saul Alinsky Marxists, Maoists, progressive revolutionaries, Saul Alinsky teaches step on the gas. He says when you're surrounded, when you're at this point, Saul Alinsky says that's when you accelerate. So let's see what they do. Do they in their actions, not their words, in their actions do they become moderates or do they become Marxists? Do they accelerate? Look at what we're looking@this point. If Scott Brown wins, Nancy Pelosi has already said we're going to do it anyway. That means in a referendum on healthcare with the deciding vote, if they accelerate like Nancy Pelosi says, that means your voice, your vote doesn't matter. Let's look at the record. Your voice doesn't matter if Nancy Pelosi accelerates. If they do it anyway, that means you're out of the picture. How about the EPA? The EPA, congress didn't pass cap and trade. So the EPA said we'll do it anyway, which means congress is irrelevant. There's a court case going on right now with the FCC. They want, what do you call it? What is that thing they are calling it?

PAT: The free press net neutrality.

GLENN: Net neutrality. They want net neutrality. The judicial system looks like they're coming back and saying no, no net neutrality. What did the FCC say? We'll just make it a public utility and we'll do it anyway.

So now let's see. What has Glenn Beck said? Glenn Beck said that you have a president and an administration that is becoming like a dictatorship. You have an administration that is becoming all powerful and everything else is just a shell, they're gutting it all out. Well, let's see what's left. Your vote won't matter if they pass it through. Congress doesn't matter, due to the EPA, and the court system doesn't matter, we're learning through the FCC. What the president's agenda is, what the progressives want to do they will do... unless I'm wrong and have been wrong for a long time and they become moderate and they take healthcare and say, we're not passing any of it. And don't worry about that; that was a mistake. And their actions, not their words, their actions become moderate.

Most self-proclaimed Marxists know very little about Marxism. Some of them have all the buzzwords memorized. They talk about the exploits of labor. They talk about the slavery of capitalist society and the alienation caused by capital. They talk about the evils of power and domination.

But they don't actually believe what they say. Or else they wouldn't be such violent hypocrites. And we're not being dramatic when we say "violent."

For them, Marxism is a political tool that they use to degrade and annoy their political enemies.

They don't actually care about the working class.

Another important thing to remember about Marxists is that they talk about how they want to defend the working class, but they don't actually understand the working class. They definitely don't realize that the working class is composed mostly of so many of the people they hate. Because, here's the thing, they don't actually care about the working class. Or the middle class. They wouldn't have the slightest clue how to actually work, not the way we do. For them, work involves ranting about how work and labor are evil.

Ironically, if their communist utopia actually arrived, they would be the first ones against the wall. Because they have nothing to offer except dissent. They have no practical use and no real connection to reality.

Again ironically, they are the ultimate proof of the success of capitalism. The fact that they can freely call for its demise, in tweets that they send from their capitalistic iPhones, is proof that capitalism affords them tremendous luxuries.

Their specialty is complaining. They are fanatics of a religion that is endlessly cynical.

They sneer at Christianity for promising Heaven in exchange for good deeds on earth — which is a terrible description of Christianity, but it's what they actually believe — and at the same time they criticize Christianity for promising a utopia, they give their unconditional devotion to a religion that promises a utopia.

They are fanatics of a religion that is endlessly cynical.

They think capitalism has turned us into machines. Which is a bad interpretation of Marx's concept of the General Intellect, the idea that humans are the ones who create machines, so humans, not God, are the creators.

They think that the only way to achieve the perfect society is by radically changing and even destroying the current society. It's what they mean when they say things about the "status quo" and "hegemony" and the "established order." They believe that the system is broken and the way to fix it is to destroy, destroy, destroy.

Critical race theory actually takes it a step farther. It tells us that the racist system can never be changed. That racism is the original sin that white people can never overcome. Of course, critical race theorists suggest "alternative institutions," but these "alternative institutions" are basically the same as the ones we have now, only less effective and actually racist.

Marx's violent revolution never happened. Or at least it never succeeded. Marx's followers have had to take a different approach. And now, we are living through the Revolution of Constant Whining.

This post is part of a series on critical race theory. Read the full series here.

Americans are losing faith in our justice system and the idea that legal consequences are applied equally — even to powerful elites in office.

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) joined Glenn Beck on the radio program to detail what he believes will come next with the Durham investigation, which hopefully will provide answers to the Obama FBI's alleged attempts to sabotage former President Donald Trump and his campaign years ago.

Rep. Nunes and Glenn assert that we know Trump did NOT collude with Russia, and that several members of the FBI possibly committed huge abuses of power. So, when will we see justice?

Watch the video clip 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.

The corporate media is doing everything it can to protect Dr. Anthony Fauci after Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) roasted him for allegedly lying to Congress about funding gain-of-function research in Wuhan, China.

During an extremely heated exchange at a Senate hearing on Tuesday, Sen. Paul challenged Dr. Fauci — who, as the director of the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases, oversees research programs at the National Institute of Health — on whether the NIH funded dangerous gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Dr. Fauci denied the claims, but as Sen. Paul knows, there are documents that prove Dr. Fauci's NIH was funding gain-of-function research in the Wuhan biolab before COVID-19 broke out in China.

On "The Glenn Beck Program," Glenn and Producer Stu Burguiere presented the proof, because Dr. Fauci's shifting defenses don't change the truth.

Watch the video clip 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.

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.

This post is part of a series on critical race theory. Read the full series here.