Glenn Beck: MLK a socialist?

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


PAT: This is kind of a game changer, isn't it?

GLENN: This is a game changer. I believe the nuclear option has just been taken.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: I cannot believe a year into this presidency they have just done this. The NAACP chairman Julian Bond said in a radio interview do we have what he said?

PAT: Yeah, I think so.

GLENN: You haven't heard it yet?

PAT: I haven't heard I had yet.

GLENN: This starts at 3:05?

PAT: That's where I have it.

GLENN: Listen to this. This is the chairman of the NAACP. Listen to this.

BOND: We don't remember the King who was the critic of capitalism is, who said

GLENN: Stop, stop, stop. I should have set this up a little bit more. He said we don't remember the King who was a critic of capitalism. King, Martin Luther King. He is talking about Martin Luther King here. Listen carefully.

BOND: Charles Fager when they were in jail together in Selma in 1965 that he thought a modified form of socialism would be the best system for the United States. We don't remember the Martin Luther King who talked ceaselessly about taking care of the masses and not just dealing with the people at the top of the ladder. So we've kind of anesthetized him. We've made him into a different kind of person than he actually was in life. And it may be that that's one reason he's so celebrated today because we celebrate a different kind of man than really existed. But he was a bit more radical. Not terribly, terribly radical but a bit more radical than we make him out to be today.

GLENN: Okay. Hold on just a second.

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: This is and correct me if I'm wrong, America. Maybe I'm wrong. But I didn't think it was politically correct ever.

PAT: Oh, my, no.

GLENN: To say that Martin Luther King was a socialist. Ever. I believe this is the first time I've ever heard this from someone, you know, on the side of praising Dr. Martin Luther King. I've heard people say, oh, well, you know, he was a communist, he was a socialist.

PAT: FBI had files on him.

GLENN: Files on him! Okay, I've never heard this as praise for Martin Luther King.

PAT: No. Anybody who's ever said it has been beat down.

GLENN: Beat down. Beat down. Sarah, would you agree with that? Is that your recollection? Keith, is that your recollection? You've never heard anything like it?

SARAH: Absolutely.

GLENN: Right? Keith?

KEITH: Absolutely, yeah, this is a first.

GLENN: Got it. But listen to the words.

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: Listen to the words. We don't remember the King that was a critic of capitalism. That wanted a modified form of socialism, that thought it would be the best system for the United States, that talked ceaselessly about taking care of the masses and not just the people at the top of the ladder.

PAT: I have it again if you want to hear it in his words.

GLENN: Yeah, go ahead, yeah, yeah.

BOND: We don't remember the King who was the critic of capitalism who said to Charles Fager when they were together in Selma in 1965 that he thought a modified form of socialism would be the best system for the United States. We don't remember the Martin Luther King who talked ceaselessly about taking care of the masses and not just dealing with the people at the top of the ladder. So we've kind of anesthetized to this.

GLENN: Listen to this.

VOICE: We've made him into a different kind of person than he actually was in life. And it may be that that's one reason he is so celebrated today because we

GLENN: Stop. Stop! We celebrate a man that is different than the kind of man that really existed. And maybe that's why he's so celebrated. Do you hear this?

PAT: That's a total admission, that if Martin Luther King, if it got out that he was a socialist or a communist or what

GLENN: He wouldn't be as celebrated.

PAT: He wouldn't be. Well, he wouldn't be.

GLENN: He wouldn't have been. Okay, so listen. So why in your wildest dreams would you do this? In your wildest dreams would the president or the chairman of the NAACP say that Martin Luther King was not terribly, terribly radical but more radical than we thought, basically a radical socialist? Why would you do that? A guy who we have combined George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. We've combined their birthdays, taken a holiday away from one of them and made it, you know, a double these two guys only deserve one day. Together, they can share it together, we'll call it President's Day. This is Martin Luther King day. Do you understand the icon that we have created? And then now to come out and say he was a radical socialist, this week, this week, this Martin Luther King holiday, why would you do that?

PAT: Hmmm.

GLENN: You are putting every chip up on the table.

PAT: After Massachusetts you have to. You have to.

GLENN: I don't know if it was after Massachusetts.

PAT: I wonder.

GLENN: It happened this week. I don't know if it was Monday or not. But you saw it coming on Monday.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: I mean, you saw it coming on Monday. But why would you do that? Look what you're risking here. If radical socialism is discredited, you have then tainted the image of Martin Luther King. You have a holiday for a guy who, if America he just said, I think it's probably why we celebrate him the way we do now, because we're celebrating somebody who really didn't exist that way. He was different than that.

Now, they're either saying here, the left, that America is a radicalized, not terribly, terribly radicalized but a radicalized socialist nation and so we'll accept it now.

PAT: No.

GLENN: Or they're saying, well, that's just the way it is and I think this is probably more likely scenario that the president is under fire and we know that a radicalized socialist is a label that is going to be attached to this president and so we want to show you that a radicalized socialist is Martin Luther King and it's okay

PAT: He's got his own holiday. Right.

PAT: Perfectly fine.

GLENN: But if, if because now they are tying the fortunes of Barack Obama's policies to Martin Luther King. If radicalized socialism falls apart, what happens to the image of Martin Luther King? If America rejects that, will America be okay with a guy who I mean, the picture that is coming out of the White House to more and more people every day that these are radical socialists, some of them, Van Jones, a radical communist, that they believe in Chairman Mao. To quote Ron Bloom, power comes from the end of a gun. To quote Anita Dunn, my one of my favorite philosophers is Chairman Mao. If this is discredited, you've just put every chip you have on the table into the kitty. When I said to you I didn't think it would happen this fast, when I said to you, I believe it was last night, I warned about it on Monday. But last night I did a monologue where I said, Thomas Paine wrote Common Sense to convince people to declare themselves independent of the British empire. And it was a tough struggle. But the easy part, believe it or not, was declaring themselves independent and swearing to each other their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor. The hard part was actually living that. Tuesday with Scott Brown, the easy part was 51% of the voters walking in and saying, I'm not a Republican or a Democrat, but I'm voting for Ron Brown and declaring themselves independent. And I said the system, just like the British, the system will now push back and react. Can you believe that I'm writing Crisis now, Pat? Remember when we talked about that this summer, just this couple of months ago? Joe, you went on vacation with me and we spent a lot of time writing crisis. And I knew that it was the right thing to do, but I was thinking to myself, I mean, is it going to be relevant? Is it going to be I mean, how many times did we have this conversation? Crisis was these are the times that try men's souls. You are of no use if you are a sunshine patriot, of no use. It's one thing to say, yep, this is what I believe, when it's easy. But things got tough in the six months after signing the Declaration of Independence. Things are going to get extraordinarily difficult in America because I mean, I don't, I don't know what I don't know how to interpret this any other way. I don't know when it became politically okay to say that Martin Luther King was a radical socialist. You wouldn't even say that about President Obama. If I got on the air and said the guy is a radical socialist, which I do, they hammer me to death! Well, if it's okay that Martin Luther King was a radical socialist, why is it bad to say Barack Obama is a radical socialist? Am I reading this wrong?

PAT: I don't think so. I don't think so. We'll see.

GLENN: I'm waiting for another explanation. I

PAT: We'll see what kind of fire, if any, Julian Bond comes under. I mean, if this is totally rejected

GLENN: No, no. Let's look for the kind of fire because this is, there are booby traps from the progressive left everywhere. I can't see the booby trap on this one, but maybe there is. There are booby traps everywhere. Let's see if I come under fire from the left for reporting Julian Bond and saying, okay, this is what he said, when did radicalized, not terribly, terribly radical, to quote Julian Bond but a radical socialist, when did that become acceptable in America? If we didn't celebrate, if he wouldn't have been as celebrated today had that news come out, when did it become okay and expect us to celebrate it today? Let's see how much fire I come under for asking that question. But look out, gang. These are the times that try men's souls. The left, look at the power arrayed with the unions and everybody else on the left. They are not going to let this one slide. They may pretend that they are being more moderate, but the uber left, if they are defending and using Martin Luther King as a radical socialist icon, they are not going to back away from socialism. Back in a minute.

In light of the national conversation surrounding the rights of free speech, religion and self-defense, Mercury One is thrilled to announce a brand new initiative launching this Father's Day weekend: a three-day museum exhibition in Dallas, Texas focused on the rights and responsibilities of American citizens.

This event seeks to answer three fundamental questions:

  1. As Americans, what responsibility do we shoulder when it comes to defending our rights?
  2. Do we as a nation still agree on the core principles and values laid out by our founding fathers?
  3. How can we move forward amidst uncertainty surrounding the intent of our founding ideals?

Attendees will be able to view historical artifacts and documents that reveal what has made America unique and the most innovative nation on earth. Here's a hint: it all goes back to the core principles and values this nation was founded on as laid out in the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.

Exhibits will show what the world was like before mankind had rights and how Americans realized there was a better way to govern. Throughout the weekend, Glenn Beck, David Barton, Stu Burguiere, Doc Thompson, Jeffy Fisher and Brad Staggs will lead private tours through the museum, each providing their own unique perspectives on our rights and responsibilities.

Schedule a private tour or purchase general admission ticket below:

June 15-17


Mercury Studios

6301 Riverside Drive, Irving, TX 75039

Learn more about the event here.

About Mercury One: Mercury One is a 501(c)(3) charity founded in 2011 by Glenn Beck. Mercury One was built to inspire the world in the same way the United States space program shaped America's national destiny and the world. The organization seeks to restore the human spirit by helping individuals and communities help themselves through honor, faith, courage, hope and love. In the words of Glenn Beck:

We don't stand between government aid and people in need. We stand with people in need so they no longer need the government

Some of Mercury One's core initiatives include assisting our nation's veterans, providing aid to those in crisis and restoring the lives of Christians and other persecuted religious minorities. When evil prevails, the best way to overcome it is for regular people to do good. Mercury One is committed to helping sustain the good actions of regular people who want to make a difference through humanitarian aid and education initiatives. Mercury One will stand, speak and act when no one else will.

Support Mercury One's mission to restore the human spirit by making an online donation or calling 972-499-4747. Together, we can make a difference.

What happened?

A New York judge ruled Tuesday that a 30-year-old still living in his parents' home must move out, CNN reported.

Failure to launch …

Michael Rotondo, who had been living in a room in his parents' house for eight years, claims that he is owed a six-month notice even though they gave him five notices about moving out and offered to help him find a place and to help pay for repairs on his car.

RELATED: It's sad 'free-range parenting' has to be legislated, it used to be common sense

“I think the notice is sufficient," New York State Supreme Court Judge Donald Greenwood said.

What did the son say?

Rotondo “has never been expected to contribute to household expenses, or assisted with chores and the maintenance of the premises, and claims that this is simply a component of his living agreement," he claimed in court filings.

He told reporters that he plans to appeal the “ridiculous" ruling.

Reform Conservatism and Reaganomics: A middle road?

SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images

Senator Marco Rubio broke Republican ranks recently when he criticized the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act by stating that “there's no evidence whatsoever that the money's been massively poured back into the American worker." Rubio is wrong on this point, as millions of workers have received major raises, while the corporate tax cuts have led to a spike in capital expenditure (investment on new projects) of 39 percent. However, the Florida senator is revisiting an idea that was front and center in the conservative movement before Donald Trump rode down an escalator in June of 2015: reform conservatism.

RELATED: The problem with asking what has conservatism conserved

The "reformicons," like Rubio, supported moving away from conservative or supply-side orthodoxy and toward policies such as the expansion of the child and earned income tax credits. On the other hand, longstanding conservative economic theory indicates that corporate tax cuts, by lowering disincentives on investment, will lead to long-run economic growth that will end up being much more beneficial to the middle class than tax credits.

But asking people to choose between free market economic orthodoxy and policies guided towards addressing inequality and the concerns of the middle class is a false dichotomy.

Instead of advocating policies that many conservatives might dismiss as redistributionist, reformicons should look at the ways government action hinders economic opportunity and exacerbates income inequality. Changing policies that worsen inequality satisfies limited government conservatives' desire for free markets and reformicons' quest for a more egalitarian America. Furthermore, pushing for market policies that reduce the unequal distribution of wealth would help attract left-leaning people and millennials to small government principles.

Criminal justice reform is an area that reformicons and free marketers should come together around. The drug war has been a disaster, and the burden of this misguided government approach have fallen on impoverished minority communities disproportionately, in the form of mass incarceration and lower social mobility. Not only has the drug war been terrible for these communities, it's proved costly to the taxpayer––well over a trillion dollars has gone into the drug war since its inception, and $80 billion dollars a year goes into mass incarceration.

Prioritizing retraining and rehabilitation instead of overcriminalization would help address inequality, fitting reformicons' goals, and promote a better-trained workforce and lower government spending, appealing to basic conservative preferences.

Government regulations tend to disproportionately hurt small businesses and new or would-be entrepreneurs. In no area is this more egregious than occupational licensing––the practice of requiring a government-issued license to perform a job. The percentage of jobs that require licenses has risen from five percent to 30 percent since 1950. Ostensibly justified by public health concerns, occupational licensing laws have, broadly, been shown to neither promote public health nor improve the quality of service. Instead, they serve to provide a 15 percent wage boost to licensed barbers and florists, while, thanks to the hundreds of hours and expensive fees required to attain the licenses, suppressing low-income entrepreneurship, and costing the economy $200 billion dollars annually.

Those economic losses tend to primarily hurt low-income people who both can't start businesses and have to pay more for essential services. Rolling back occupational licenses will satisfy the business wing's desire for deregulation and a more free market and the reformicons' support for addressing income inequality and increasing opportunity.

The favoritism at play in the complex tax code perpetuates inequality.

Tax expenditures form another opportunity for common ground between the Rubio types and the mainstream. Tax deductions and exclusions, both on the individual and corporate sides of the tax code, remain in place after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Itemized deductions on the individual side disproportionately benefit the wealthy, while corporate tax expenditures help well-connected corporations and sectors, such as the fossil fuel industry.

The favoritism at play in the complex tax code perpetuates inequality. Additionally, a more complicated tax code is less conducive to economic growth than one with lower tax rates and fewer exemptions. Therefore, a simpler tax code with fewer deductions and exclusions would not only create a more level playing field, as the reformicons desire, but also additional economic growth.

A forward-thinking economic program for the Republican Party should marry the best ideas put forward by both supply-siders and reform conservatives. It's possible to take the issues of income inequality and lack of social mobility seriously, while also keeping mainstay conservative economic ideas about the importance of less cumbersome regulations and lower taxes.

Alex Muresianu is a Young Voices Advocate studying economics at Tufts University. He is a contributor for Lone Conservative, and his writing has appeared in Townhall and The Daily Caller. He can be found on Twitter @ahardtospell.

Is this what inclusivity and tolerance look like? Fox News host Tomi Lahren was at a weekend brunch with her mom in Minnesota when other patrons started yelling obscenities and harassing her. After a confrontation, someone threw a drink at her, the moment captured on video for social media.

RELATED: Glenn Addresses Tomi Lahren's Pro-Choice Stance on 'The View'

On today's show, Pat and Jeffy talked about this uncomfortable moment and why it shows that supposedly “tolerant" liberals have to resort to physical violence in response to ideas they don't like.