Warning: This video will make you vomit




Related Video

GLENN: I've seen pandering before in my life. I have not seen anything, anything like the latest John McCain ad in Arizona. It — I got a note last night from Dan who writes our newsletter and he said — the subject line said, you may vomit. I hesitated to even open it. I'm like, well, I don't want to vomit. And I open it up and it's — he just says, have you seen the new John McCain ad; you may vomit. Again I hesitated, but I watched it.

PAT: He's tough on the border.

GLENN: Now, let me —

PAT: Tough.

GLENN: Let me tell you as we play it here for you, you may vomit. I've never, ever seen anything like this. It's John McCain walking next to the border fence with a border patrol agent. Here it is.

SENATOR McCAIN: Human smuggling, home invasions, murder.

VOICE: We're outmanned. Of all the illegals in America, more than half come through Arizona. Have we got the right plan? Plan's perfect. You bring troops, state, county and local law enforcement together.

SENATOR McCAIN: And complete the dang fence.

VOICE: It will work this time. Senator, you are one of us.

Lunacy of the Left


Check out Glenn's op-ed on Arizona and immigration in the Pittsburgh Tribune.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. Oh, my gosh. What?

SENATOR McCAIN: I'm John McCain and I approved this message.

GLENN: Wait a minute, hang on just a second. You are one of us, what? A lizard person, V? What? I expected the border patrol agent just to lift his eyelid down a little bit and go, Senator, you're one of us (smacking lips like lizard). I mean, it is — I've never seen anything like it.

PAT: It's amazing.

GLENN: You bring the troops, the law enforcement and you — and complete the dang fence? First of all, who says "Dang"? Not a guy who was kept in a bamboo cage for a year. He's not saying "Dang."

STU: Well, didn't he specifically call it the GD fence another time?

PAT: That sounds very familiar, which is part of the reason —

STU: Got to find that.

PAT: This is such an insult to our intelligence.

GLENN: Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute. He called it the GD fence?

PAT: I think he did.

GLENN: Like a negative?

STU: If they want us to build the GD fence, I'll build the GD fence.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

PAT: This was even two years ago during the campaign he was challenged on immigration and he got — well, he was giving the speech about how tough he is and how good he is on immigration and here's what happened.

SENATOR McCAIN: Now, it seems to me that various things have to happen depending on how long they've been here, what their record has been, whether they have been a — could I —

PAT: And they don't lying that.

SENATOR McCAIN: Now, come on. Come on. Many have to be, many have to be —

PAT: My friends, come on. My friends.

SENATOR McCAIN: Look, life's too short, my friend. I will move on except to say to you that I will secure the borders, I will secure the borders first. But I'll tell you this, ma'am. I'm not going to call up the soldier that's fighting in Iraq today and tell him I'm going to deport his mother. I'm not going to do that. You can do it.

PAT: Where was that on the walk with the border agent? "I'm not going to call him an immigrant, his mother and tell him that he can't serve in Iraq. I'm not going to — you can do that. You can." That's never what — it's not what this is about. It's never been about that. Nobody is — you know, I think if you are an immigrant and you've served in the military, you should probably get automatic citizenship. But how many, how many instances do we have of illegal immigrants serving in the U.S. military?

GLENN: I think we have —

PAT: There may be some.

GLENN: There may be quite a few.

PAT: And it's not the rule.

GLENN: And I'd agree with you.

PAT: It's not what this thing's about.

GLENN: I would agree with you what if you choose to serve in the military —

PAT: You should probably get automatic.

STU: Wait. Should you be serving in the military if you are an illegal immigrant? You shouldn't get in the in the first place.

PAT: That's true.

GLENN: We're in an insane world now. We're in an insane world. But if you are serving in the military right now, yeah, I think so. Now, I'm not going to make that blanket. I'm not going to — you can't even have this discussion now because if you start leaning that way, everybody will cross the border and then serve in the military and what do you have in the military?

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: Now you've got a bunch of people who are only doing it for citizenship.

PAT: That's right.

GLENN: But there are people — I remember a story of a guy who was out of San Diego, I think, that is — it's been too many years. But there was somebody that was, I thought an illegal immigrant and he was serving in the military, I think, and he was from San Diego and he was really a patriotic guy. I mean, he really believed it. And — go ahead.

STU: I'm having problems with this. I understand that there might be — certainly you can find a great story in every sort of example of everything.

GLENN: No, no. Just like I said — just like I say, everybody's coming over the border is a good family man.

STU: Right, and a lot of them are good family men. I understand that. But, you know, the idea that — I mean, if someone who was an illegal immigrant got into the military and we didn't know they were an illegal immigrant —

GLENN: Hang on. Hold on.

STU: I don't think —

GLENN: Do you know what we've just done?

STU: What's that?

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. Look what we've just done.

STU: What have we just done?

GLENN: We're not arguing about the border. We're arguing what to do with people who are already here. Stop, stop.

STU: Yeah.

PAT: And by the way, this is all from the guy.

GLENN: Complete the dang fence.

PAT: Complete the dang fence, my friends.

STU: We have that quote, by the way. This is from Vanity Fair, a profile of McCain. Quote: In the short term it probably galvanizes our base, talking about immigration. In the long term you alienate the Hispanics, you'll pay a heavy price. Then he added, unable to help himself, "By the way, I think the fence is least effective; I'll build the GD fence if they want it." But I'll build the GD fence if they want it.

PAT: And let's not forget, please, that this is the same guy who crafted the amnesty bill with Ted Kennedy, the liberal lion. I mean, this guy has never been tough on the border, he's never been tough on immigration and now that he's trying to win this election against J. D. Hayworth who always has been, now all of a sudden, let's build that GD fence, my friends. Why hasn't that fence even been built yet? It saddens me that this thing's been held up for so long, my friends. Fight with me, my friends! Fight with me to close this border! Fight with me to secure our border for Americans.

GLENN: Listen. I want to read this again. You know, Tragedy and Hope is a book by Carroll Quigley. He was the guy who got Bill Clinton in as a Rhodes scholar, he is a professor at Harvard, at George Washington University, I think at Princeton. He wrote a book in 1962, Tragedy and Hope. The tragedy was world war, global war. We had just come out of two of them, 1962. The hope was they fixed it. The progressives had fixed it: We'll never have global war again; don't worry. It was the war to end all wars. We just figured it out. And the first thing we had to do was go to the UN, but we're going towards a global government, and I know nobody wants a global government, but that's okay because we're building it anyway. And what we've done is we've just tied everybody together economically. This goes to my perfect storm theory, that once you have all of these things coming at once, the system cannot stand, and it is a global system. It was tied together for — behind your back for good purposes, to provide hope. It was the idea of global economic destruction, mutually assured economic destruction. Just like MAED was for, they will launch all their missiles, we'll launch all our missiles and then they will kill each other and there will be nothing left and nobody will win. That was the idea, except instead of nuclear weapons, it was the economy. But I — there was something else that stuck out as I was rereading. It was this. From the same book, 1962, Tragedy and Hope, Professor Carroll Quigley, an adviser to almost every president in his day. The argument that the two parties could represent opposed ideals and policies, one perhaps of the right and the other of the left, is a foolish idea, acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead the two parties should almost be identical so that the American people can throw the rascals out at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy.

Now, what is the biggest thing that you — you say all the time, I voted — look. You voted for Obama. He said he wasn't going to round people up on the streets. They are now talking about suspension of the Miranda rights for citizens. Your Supreme Court nominee just said 90 days ago that if you are picked up, if you are picked up and you are suspected of financing terror, they can hold you indefinitely without trial. That's your new Supreme Court justice nominee. That would horrify Dick Cheney. I thought we were moving away from this. It should be possible to replace every four years, if necessary, the other party. None of these things — they will pursue none of — wait. Wait, wait. It should be possible to replace it every four years if necessary by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue with new vigor approximately the same basic policies.

So in other words, you are so sick of the Republicans because they are spending us into oblivion and so the Democrats say we're going to clean up the mess, we're going to drain the swamp, we're going to cut back on spending. And what happens? They get in and they are worse. So you want to vote out Republicans — or Democrats. If it were any other time, we would have voted in the Republicans. And what would the Republicans do? The same damn thing. What Carroll Quigley is expressing here is the heart of progressivism. It looks like two choices but it's only one. We've been duped all of these years, and people like John McCain have been part of it. He is a progressive. Theodore Roosevelt is his hero, the guy who started the Progressive Party. Hello. So what is he saying? "I'll build the dang fence if they have to. If they force me to, I'll do it." He knows better than you. He will say whatever it is he has to say to get elected.

Arizona, Arizona, if you elect this guy again, you get what you deserve. I mean, how much more do you need? You get what you deserve. And by the way, if you don't think he has contempt for you, you are mistaken. How can anyone put that ad out and expect their constituents to buy it. He thinks you are a dope. He has contempt for you. I'll build the GD fence if they force me to, or whatever it was he said. Basically he's saying it's not the answer but you're so stupid, if you insist that that's the answer, I'll do it, but I'm going to do it my way anyway. And now this ad? Wow, Arizona. I don't know how you make that choice. I don't know what your choices are, but I don't know how you make that one.

PAT: So you are saying vote for John McCain, my friends? Is that what you are saying, Mr. Beck? Vote for John McCain. Fight for me to close the border! Fight with me to secure America's future! Fight with me to build the fence, my friends! I've been fighting for the fence my whole career.

GLENN: I mean, the only thing that he hasn't said and now — I'm waiting for him to come out and say he's against cap and trade. I mean, I'm just waiting for it. It's like Lindsey Graham is going to come out anytime and say he's against cap and trade.

By the way, you know cap and trade is on the bill now? It's on the docket, May 12th. May 12th. You know who's not on that?

PAT: That's tomorrow.

GLENN: Lindsey Graham. Yeah, yeah.

PAT: That's tomorrow.

GLENN: Lindsey Graham.

PAT: Not on the bill?

GLENN: Not on the bill. Now it's just Democrats. He was there!

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: He wanted to introduce it.

PAT: Up until, what, two weeks ago, three?

GLENN: Mmm hmmm.

PAT: At the most?

STU: Yeah.

The great beyond. What does it hide from us? Do unknown lifeforms linger in the dark? In other words, was David Bowie right? Is there life on Mars? The head of Harvard University's Astronomy Department contends that, yes, there is. Well, not that there's life on Mars. I'll explain in just a minute.

In an academic article for the Astrophysical Journal Letters, Dr. Avi Loeb, the head of Harvard University's Astronomy Department, claimed that an alien probe entered our solar system. He claimed that it is masked as the space rock Oumuamua (Ow-moo-ah-moo-ah), "the first interstellar object to enter our solar system." It turns out that "space rock" is way more than a musical genre.

RELATED: Science saves us again: Octopuses are really aliens who crash-landed on Earth

In his own words:

Considering an artificial origin, one possibility is that 'Oumuamua is a lightsail, floating in interstellar space as a debris from an advanced technological equipment.

His evidence? pointed to the space rock's abnormal acceleration, activity which he gathered via the Hubble Space Telescope.

He added that "the lightsail technology might be abundantly used for transportation of cargo between planets."

Sounds a bit like Star Wars, no? Or are you more of a Star Trek fan? Either way, it's an odd thing to hear from the head of Harvard University's Astronomy Department. Typically, we hear these sorts of things from the darker corners of the History Channel.

Well, I'll say that, at this point, I'm not really surprised. It's 2019. I'm not surprised by anything anymore.

"I don't care what people say," Loeb said. "It doesn't matter to me. I say what I think, and if the broad public takes an interest in what I say, that's a welcome result as far as I'm concerned, but an indirect result. Science isn't like politics: It is not based on popularity polls."

Honestly, I believe the guy. Well, I'll say that, at this point, I'm not really surprised. It's 2019. I'm not surprised by anything anymore. Heck, I welcome alien lifeforms. Maybe they can give us some advice on how to get our world together.

The third annual Women's March is approaching, and the movement has shown signs of strife. It's imploding, really. An article in Tablet Magazine revealed deep-seated antisemitism among the co-chairs of the movement, which is funny for a movement that brands itself as a haven of "intersectionality." The examples pile up, and just yesterday there was another. I'll tell you about it in a minute.

The Women's March has been imploding, and it started at the very top. Four women have come to represent the diverse face of the movement, the co-chairs: Tamika Mallory, Carmen Perez, Linda Sarsour, and Bob Bland.

RELATED: LEFTIST INSANITY: Woman attacked at women's rights rally for exercising her rights

Increasingly, we've learned that anti-Semitism is common among these women.

Teresa Shook, who founded the Women's March has repeatedly asked them to step down: The co-chairs "have steered the Movement away from its true course. I have waited, hoping they would right the ship," Shook wrote. "But they have not. In opposition to our Unity Principles, they have allowed anti-Semitism, anti-LBGTQIA sentiment and hateful, racist rhetoric to become a part of the platform by their refusal to separate themselves from groups that espouse these racist, hateful beliefs."

Tamika Mallory gave us the latest example, by continuing to stand by Louis Farrakhan. Check out Tamika's arrogant, nonsensical response. But the real problem came at the end of Mallory's rambling non-answer.



Women's March Leader Tamika Mallory Doubles Down On Love For Louis Farrakhan youtu.be


Later this week I'll go over the entire controversy on Glenn TV. It's harrowing, really. For now, I'll leave you with this. Critics of 4th wave feminism have argued that the radical identity politics of the left will lead to the exact kind of mistreatment that feminists claim to be against. That argument has been written off as using the slippery slope fallacy. But, as we see with the Women's March, it is in fact a brutal reality.

Remember how serious Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi were last week, when they gave their "rebuttal" to President Trump's address? They made it seem like this government shutdown is apocalyptic. A lot of Democrats have done the same. On social media and CNN at least. Thirty Democrats, however, took a different route. Puerto Rico. For cocktails at the beach.

RELATED: The President won the night, but don't count on the media to admit it

A group of 30 Democrats have turned the government shutdown into a live-action interpretation of a Jimmy Buffet song:

Nibblin' on sponge cake, Watchin' the sun bake.

No, seriously. In the words of Press Secretary Sarah Sanders:

Democrats in Congress are so alarmed about federal workers not getting paid they're partying on the beach instead of negotiating a compromise to reopen the government and secure the border.

A photo of New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez at a resort beach has gone viral.

They arrived via chartered jet. They're staying at a seaside resort, and attended the ridiculously-priced and overhyped play "Hamilton," where tickets for opening night "ranged from $10 to $5,000," according to the Associated Press. They even attended several afterparties.

Of course, the official occasion seems legit. They're in San Juan for the Congressional Hispanic Caucus BOLD PAC. According to a memo for the gathering:

This year's winter retreat promises to be our most widely attended yet with over 220 guests, including 39 Members of Congress and CHC BOLD PAC supporters expected to attend and participate!

Also in attendance, about 109 lobbyists, from a number of places, including "R.J. Reynolds, Facebook, Comcast, Amazon, PhRMA, Microsoft, Intel, Verizon, and unions like the National Education Association."

Donald Jr. said it well:

And of course no one says anything. I'm not even in government and I'd get killed in the press if I was on vacation right now. Why won't they cover their democrat buddies lobbyist sponsored vacation in the islands???

Maduro takes office and Venezuelans vote with their feet

CRIS BOURONCLE/AFP/Getty Images

Venezuela continues to collapse. A country that used to have the world's largest oil reserves is now in rags. Its money is worthless, with inflation near one million percent. People must work an average of five days at minimum wage just to afford a dozen eggs. But there is one person still pumped about Venezuela's future – its noble president, Nicolas Maduro! I'll tell you why he's still enthusiastic in just a minute…

Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro had a stellar 2018. Here are some highlights:

  • Running water and electricity only work occasionally and prices for basic goods doubled.
  • Doctors, engineers, oil workers, and electricians fled the country en masse. Over 48,000 teachers also left the country.
  • Over half a million Venezuelans fled to Peru alone.

Maduro created a new digital currency called the "petro." One petro is supposed to equal the price of a barrel of oil, about $60. U.S. Treasury Department officials call the petro a scam. Who could've seen that coming?

Maduro also announced a 3,000 percent minimum-wage hike. Even Ocasio-Cortez might roll her eyes at that one. Or find it inspiring.

And just yesterday, a Human Rights Watch report detailed how Venezuelan intelligence and security forces are arresting and torturing military personnel and their family members who are accused of plotting against Maduro. The torture includes: "brutal beatings, asphyxiation, cutting soles of their feet with a razor blade, electric shocks, food deprivation, [and] forbidding them to go to the bathroom."

It's so bad in Venezuela that even The Washington Post admits Venezuela's problems are mostly due to "failed socialist policies." But President Nicolas Maduro gave a televised New Year's address calling 2019, "the year of new beginnings." He's pumped, you see, because today he will be sworn in for his second six-year term as president. He was "re-elected" last May in an election that the international community declared illegitimate.

Thirteen nations released a statement last week urging Maduro not to take office and saying they would not recognize his presidency.

Maduro doesn't have many friends left at home or abroad. Thirteen nations released a statement last week urging Maduro not to take office and saying they would not recognize his presidency. This week, the U.S. added more Venezuelan officials to its sanctions list.

In a press conference yesterday, Maduro said:

There's a coup against me, led by Washington. I tell our civilians and our military to be ready. Our people will respond.

I think the people of Venezuela who have the means are already responding – by leaving.