Glenn Beck: Why Obama Is Flip-Flopping on Reconciliation





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

The louder America speaks, the less this administration seems to listen.

The tribe has spoken clearly on health care: 73 percent want this bill scrapped; 52 percent are against the reforms altogether. President Obama came out Wednesday and said he's just going forward and using reconciliation. But America opposes use of reconciliation by a 52 to 39 percent margin.

And even he seemed to oppose the "50-plus-one" option in 2007:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

THEN-SENATOR BARACK OBAMA: You've got to break out of what I call, sort of, the 50-plus-one pattern of presidential politics. Maybe you eke out a victory of 50-plus-one, then you can't govern. You know, you get Air Force One, I mean there are a lot of nice perks, but you can't deliver on health care. We're not going to pass universal health care with a 50-plus-one strategy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

Universal health care? Wait a minute, didn't the president just say this summer that he's not for universal health care?

Weird. Anyway, if you can't govern like that, then why are you doing it? Here's a hint from James Carville:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMES CARVILLE, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: If the bill loses, it proves Senator DeMint right. It will, I think, by and large, be a lot of the president's Waterloo and I think a lot of Democrats understand that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

Let me give you the real answer, not from me but from Andy Stern:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDY STERN, PRESIDENT OF SEIU: The politics are complicated. You know, people are making investments in politics and they expect the return on their, I mean, on their investments. There's not an ideology involved in corporations. They're looking for a return on their investments.

I'm totally involved in distorting the political system, you know, with contributions. You know, that's what — that's what we've become in America, so we have to do that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

So that's what's happening. They just want a return on their investment. They spent at least $75 million on the election and that's just this one union. And now they demand results. Look at this press release from SEIU: "SEIU Members to Politicians: Live Up to Your Promises or We Will Hold You Accountable."

We don't want a European health care system. I know our system isn't perfect, but what's this obsession with trying to be more like Europe? Is it because they have more museums and more compact cars? Do we envy their funny-looking teeth and overall bad personal hygiene? What is so great about Europe that I am missing?

Before 1900, Europe tried to be like us. They built the Statue of Liberty in France in 1884 as a way to show the French to be more like America. At the time we were expanding our economy. When we eventually started to mimic them, we began contracting. And the more we follow their lead, the more problems we have. Usually when you try and emulate someone, it's someone who's good at what they do. Do any contestants on "American Idol" say, "Yeah, I want to be just like Vanilla Ice"?

Well, Europe is Vanilla Ice. And in Vanilla's defense, he has had one hit in the last 100 years. Give me the victories of Europe in the last 100 years. What's Europe ever done? Besides screw everything up?

Right now they are imploding: Spain had 18.1 percent unemployment at the end of '09 and it's expected to hit 20 percent this year; Greece is broke; Ireland and England are on the brink of economic disaster. It's a total mess. And we are looking at *that* model and saying, "Yeah, give me some of that!" Apparently so, because here we are marching down the health care road, looking for more big government and more handouts. Despite the reams and reams of evidence to show spending and big government aren't working.

Take a look at this chart here — this will blow your mind. We aren't making any more but we keep spending; how is that working out? It can't be that great, because I saw Obama's economic team Tuesday say yeah, don't pay attention to the latest jobs numbers. That was because of the snow or something. Just ignore it

Is this how it works in your family? When the income flat-lines, do you just start buying up boats and vacation houses and spend more money than you ever have before? And then tell your wife to ignore the bill? In what universe does this make sense? How does it make sense to have Andy Stern, who is bankrupting the union he runs and who is all for global government and globalization, be on the committee to fix our deficit? And how will we address all of America's concerns when we have to worry about the whole globe equally?

How about cap-and-trade? We are still pushing that. Even Progressive Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham has proposed putting a price on carbon, starting with a very focused carbon tax.

Spain tried this and they are paying the price: For every green job gained, they lost two elsewhere in the economy. And remember what the president about cap-and-trade?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

THEN-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE BARACK OBAMA: Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

"Necessarily skyrocket." I guess he wasn't kidding: According to Harvard's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, to meet the Obama administration's targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions, Americans may have to experience gasoline that costs $7 a gallon.

How does $7 dollars a gallon make sense in this economy? Will that help your family?

I'm not the smartest guy in the world. I barely made it past Algebra. But I can see this isn't sustainable. And you can see it. There are much smarter people who have achieved power and who are currently voting and crafting health care and cap-and-trade and the stimulus. Are we supposed to believe they have no idea big government doesn't work?

The only way any of this makes any sense, is a theory we've talked about on this show many times: Cloward and Piven. These are popular and influential radical leftists who felt the only way to implement the system they wanted was to collapse the current one. Make sure to have the structure of the new system in place and voila.

Europe knows it's falling apart. It's not like they are proudly running infomercials: "Hey Americans, are you tired of the same old boring republic? Well, we've got the system for you!" No, they are looking to a new model. And their new model isn't, "Wow, there is too much government control here. We need to scale back." France and Germany have come out now and proposed this new structure that are doubling down and going for an even *more* oppressive and bloated government. And that new system resembles China more than anything else.

China is becoming the new it model around the globe. And if China is what Europe really wants, then guess what, we are all moving towards China. We should consider ourselves lucky if we come out of this thing looking like France.

Why do you think there are so many Maoists hanging around the White House? Ron Bloom, Anita Dunn, Van Jones. Because it's where we are headed. And remember, this isn't a place you want to live. Yes, they have 200 million people living comfortably in the middle class. That's great. But the other 1 billion are living in complete and total hell: poverty and oppression.

Do you remember the young Chinese Olympic gymnast from the 2008 Beijing Games? Here's the press conference exchange after she won a medal:

"Were your parents here to see you compete, among the cheering crowds?"

"I don't know."

"When was the last time you went home?"

"Ummm ... before I joined the national team,"

"When was that?"

"More than a year ago."

Does that sound like the system you want your kids growing up in? Sure, they can make things cheaper. But how do you think they do it?

So, back to health care, let me see if I have this right: If you are sick already, the government says health insurance companies have to take you person. And, once covered, they can never drop you. Well, those sound nice. But if they also are going to cap the rates — it doesn't work in business. It will put all insurance companies out of business.

And that is the intention here: To collapse the system and create a new one.

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

The number of people serving life sentences now exceeds the entire prison population in 1970, according to newly-released data from the Sentencing Project. The continued growth of life sentences is largely the result of "tough on crime" policies pushed by legislators in the 1990s, including presidential candidate Joe Biden.

Biden has since apologized for backing those types of policies, but it seems he has yet to learn his lesson. Indeed, Biden is backing yet another criminal justice policy with disastrous consequences—mandatory drug treatment for all drug offenders.

Proponents of this policy argue that forced drug treatment will reduce drug usage and recidivism and save lives. But the evidence simply isn't on their side. Mandatory treatment isn't just patently unethical, it's also ineffective—and dangerous.

Many well-meaning people view mandatory treatment as a positive alternative to incarceration. But there's a reason that mandatory treatment is also known as "compulsory confinement." As author Maya Schenwar asks in The Guardian, "If shepherding live human bodies off to prison to isolate and manipulate them without their permission isn't ethical, why is shipping those bodies off to compulsory rehab an acceptable alternative?" Compulsory treatment isn't an alternative to incarceration. It is incarceration.

Compulsory treatment is also arguably a breach of international human rights agreements and ethical standards. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) have made it clear that the standards of ethical treatment also apply to the treatment of drug dependence—standards that include the right to autonomy and self-determination. Indeed, according to UNODC, "people who use or are dependent on drugs do not automatically lack the capacity to consent to treatment...consent of the patient should be obtained before any treatment intervention." Forced treatment violates a person's right to be free from non-consensual medical treatment.

It's a useless endeavor, anyway, because studies have shown that it doesn't improve outcomes in reducing drug use and criminal recidivism. A review of nine studies, published in the International Journal of Drug Policy, failed to find sufficient evidence that compulsory drug treatment approaches are effective. The results didn't suggest improved outcomes in reducing drug use among drug-dependent individuals enrolled in compulsory treatment. However, some studies did suggest potential harm.

According to one study, 33% of compulsorily-treated participants were reincarcerated, compared to a mere 5% of the non-treatment sample population. Moreover, rates of post-release illicit drug use were higher among those who received compulsory treatment. Even worse, a 2016 report from the Massachusetts Department of Public Health found that people who received involuntary treatment were more than twice as likely to die of an opioid-related overdose than those with a history of only voluntary treatment.

These findings echo studies published in medical journals like Addiction and BMJ. A study in Addiction found that involuntary drug treatment was a risk factor for a non-fatal drug overdose. Similarly, a study in BMJ found that patients who successfully completed inpatient detoxification were more likely than other patients to die within a year. The high rate of overdose deaths by people previously involuntarily treated is likely because most people who are taken involuntarily aren't ready to stop using drugs, authors of the Addiction study reported. That makes sense. People who aren't ready to get clean will likely use again when they are released. For them, the only post-treatment difference will be lower tolerance, thanks to forced detoxification and abstinence. Indeed, a loss of tolerance, combined with the lack of a desire to stop using drugs, likely puts compulsorily-treated patients at a higher risk of overdose.

The UNODC agrees. In their words, compulsory treatment is "expensive, not cost-effective, and neither benefits the individual nor the community." So, then, why would we even try?

Biden is right to look for ways to combat addiction and drug crime outside of the criminal justice system. But forced drug treatment for all drug offenders is a flawed, unethical policy, with deadly consequences. If the goal is to help people and reduce harm, then there are plenty of ways to get there. Mandatory treatment isn't one of them.

Lindsay Marie is a policy analyst for the Lone Star Policy Institute, an independent think tank that promotes freedom and prosperity for all Texans. You can follow her on Twitter @LindsayMarieLP.

President Donald Trump's personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani joined Glenn Beck on Tuesday's radio program discuss the Senate's ongoing investigation into former vice president Joe Biden's son, Hunter Biden, and reveal new bombshell documents he's currently releasing.

Giuliani told Glenn he has evidence of "very, very serious crime at the highest levels of government," that the "corrupt media" is doing everything in their power to discredit.

He also dropped some major, previously unreported news: not only was Hunter Biden under investigation in 2016, when then-Vice President Biden "forced" the firing of Ukraine's prosecutor general Viktor Shokin, but so was the vice president himself.

"Shokin can prove he was investigating Biden and his son. And I now have the prosecutorial documents that show, all during that period of time, not only was Hunter Biden under investigation -- Joe Biden was under investigation," Giuliani explained. "It wasn't just Hunter."

Watch this clip to get a rundown of everything Giuliani has uncovered so far.

Use code GLENN to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

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.

For most Americans, the 1980s was marked by big hair, epic lightsaber battles, and school-skipping Ferris Bueller dancing his way into the hearts of millions.

But for Bernie Sanders — who, by the way, was at that time the oldest-looking 40-year-old in human history — the 1980s was a period of important personal milestones.

Prior to his successful 1980 campaign to become mayor of Burlington, Vermont, Sanders was mostly known around the Green Mountain State as a crazy, wildly idealistic socialist. (Think Karl Marx meets Don Quixote.) But everything started to change for Sanders when he became famous—or, in the eyes of many, notorious—for being "America's socialist mayor."

As mayor, Sanders' radical ideas were finally given the attention he had always craved but couldn't manage to capture. This makes this period of his career particularly interesting to study. Unlike today, the Bernie Sanders of the 1980s wasn't concerned with winning over an entire nation — just the wave of far-left New York City exiles that flooded Vermont in the 1960s and 1970s — and he was much more willing to openly align himself with local and national socialist and communist parties.


www.youtube.com


Over the past few weeks, I have been reading news reports of Sanders recorded in the 1980s — because, you know, that's how guys like me spend their Saturday nights — and what I've found is pretty remarkable.

For starters, Sanders had (during the height of the Soviet Union) a very cozy relationship with people who openly advocated for Marxism and communism. He was an elector for the Socialist Workers Party and promoted the party's presidential candidates in 1980 and 1984.

To say the Socialist Workers Party was radical would be a tremendous understatement. It was widely known SWP was a communist organization mostly dedicated to the teachings of Marx and Leon Trotsky, one of the leaders of the Russian Revolution.

Among other radical things I've discovered in interviews Sanders conducted with the SWP's newspaper — appropriately named The Militant (seriously, you can't make this stuff up) — is a statement by Sanders published in June 1981 suggesting that some police departments "are dominated by fascists and Nazis," a comment that is just now being rediscovered for the first time in decades.

In 1980, Sanders lauded the Socialist Workers Party's "continued defense of the Cuban revolution." And later in the 1980s, Sanders reportedly endorsed a collection of speeches by the socialist Sandinistas in Nicaragua, even though there had been widespread media reports of the Sandinistas' many human rights violations prior to Sanders' endorsement, including "restrictions on free movement; torture; denial of due process; lack of freedom of thought, conscience and religion; denial of the right of association and of free labor unions."

Sanders also traveled to Nicaragua and met with socialist President Daniel Ortega. He later called the trip a "profoundly emotional experience."

Sanders also traveled to Nicaragua and met with socialist President Daniel Ortega. He later called the trip a "profoundly emotional experience."

Comrade Bernie's disturbing Marxist past, which is far more extensive than what can be covered in this short article, shouldn't be treated as a mere historical footnote. It clearly illustrates that Sanders' brand of "democratic socialism" is much more than a $15 minimum wage and calls for single-payer health care. It's full of Marxist philosophy, radical revolutionary thinking, anti-police rhetoric, and even support for authoritarian governments.

Millions of Americans have been tricked into thinking Sanders isn't the radical communist the historical record — and even Sanders' own words — clearly show that he is. But the deeper I have dug into Comrade Bernie's past, the more evident it has become that his thinking is much darker and more dangerous and twisted than many of his followers ever imagined.

Tomorrow night, don't miss Glenn Beck's special exposing the radicals who are running Bernie Sanders' campaign. From top to bottom, his campaign is staffed with hard-left extremists who are eager to burn down the system. The threat to our constitution is very real from Bernie's team, and it's unlike anything we've ever seen before in a U.S. election. Join Glenn on Wednesday, at 9 PM Eastern on BlazeTV's YouTube page, and on BlazeTV.com. And just in case you miss it live, the only way to catch all of Glenn's specials on-demand is by subscribing to Blaze TV.

Justin Haskins (Jhaskins@heartland.org) is editorial director of The Heartland Institute and editor-in-chief of StoppingSocialism.com.

Candace Owens, BLEXIT founder and author of the upcoming book, "Blackout," joined Glenn Beck on Friday's GlennTV for an exclusive interview. available only to BlazeTV subscribers.

Candace dropped a few truth-bombs about the progressive movement and what's happening to the Democratic Party. She said people are practically running away from the left due to their incessant push to dig up dirt on anybody who disagrees with their radical ideology. She explained how -- like China and its "social credit score" -- the left is shaping America into its own nightmarish episode of "Black Mirror."

"This game of making sure that everyone is politically correct is a societal atom bomb. There are no survivors. There's no one that is perfect," Candace said. "The idea that humanity can be perfect is Godless. If you accept that there is something greater than us, then you accept that we a flawed. To be human is to be flawed."

Enjoy this clip from the full episode below:

youtu.be


BlazeTV subscribers can watch the full interview on BlazeTV.com. Use code GLENN to save $10 off one year of your subscription.

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.