Glenn Beck: NASA's new mission -- make Muslim countries 'feel good'

GLENN: From high above Times Square in Midtown Manhattan, third most listened to show in all of America. My name is Glenn Beck. So I have to play some amazing audio here of the new chief of NASA. Okay, the space exploration, whatever. Let's make NASA's main, main mission to make Muslim countries feel good — I'm quoting — feel good about themselves and their contribution in history to math and science. Here is the chief of NASA.

VOICE: Charged me with three things. One is he wanted me to help reinspire children to get into science and math. He wanted me to expand our international relationships and third and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations, to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science and engineering.

PAT: Wow. Gosh, that's —

GLENN: Wow.

PAT: That's the charge given to Charles Bolden by the president of the United States for the NASA mission.

GLENN: That's the most condescending thing I've ever heard.

PAT: Foremost.

GLENN: Foremost.

PAT: That was his foremost mission.

GLENN: But imagine how condescending that is to say that NASA's going to go over and say, look who's been smart in the past, look what you've done. Who can take an abacus and turn it upside down? You can. I mean, that is the most condescending thing I've ever heard. Make them feel good about their history. And isn't that so very progressive. Make them feel good. That's the charge of NASA? That's what we're doing with NASA money?

PAT: Well, what would you do with NASA? I mean, you don't — you know, it's a space program. What are you going to do?

GLENN: You've already been to space.

PAT: You're not going to go to space.

GLENN: We've already been to space.

PAT: We've been to the moon.

GLENN: If that's your charge, shut NASA down.

PAT: Yep.

GLENN: If that's your charge, shut it down. You know there are some things that only the government can do because it is so big of a charge, such a huge charge. I no longer think that NASA is the only one that can go to space because we've seen it with the X rocket. You can do it. So NASA's looking for a new mission. If that is the new mission of NASA, I don't even know what that has to do with space. Shut it down.

PAT: No, because they are also doing global warming. So it's the Muslim outreach.

GLENN: Oh.

PAT: And you are doing the climate change, too. So —

GLENN: We have Darrell Clegg Washington on the phone now.

KLEGWORTH: Darrell Klegworth.

GLENN: Klegworth?

KLEGWORTH: Yes. I'm the associate director of Glenn Beck Obama research outreach.

GLENN: Wait. I didn't know we had one of those. What is this?

KLEGWORTH: The Glenn Beck coalition to outreach to Obama's force.

PAT: What?

GLENN: The Obama outreach?

KLEGWORTH: Yes.

GLENN: We're reaching out to Obama supporters?

KLEGWORTH: We are. We believe that it's important for many of the listeners out there who have voted for Barack Obama but might listen to Glenn Beck to know that they're excellent at math.

PAT: Really?

KLEGWORTH: They're excellent at —

GLENN: How is — I didn't — first of all —

PAT: How do we even know they are excellent at math?

KLEGWORTH: They are fantastic at it. Have you ever met these people?

GLENN: Hang on just a second. No, I haven't and I — I mean, first of all, they are probably not listening to us.

KLEGWORTH: Very important to reach out to them. They are listening very closely. A lot of people seem alienated by the fact that you bring up all of Obama's faults and his connections to nefarious people.

GLENN: Right, but I don't —

KLEGWORTH: But they really need to come along to the Glenn Beck business and to be customers and listeners of yours for years to come is to realize that we understand here at the Glenn Beck program that they know their times tables. They have studied both long and short division.

GLENN: Hang on just a second. I don't think this is what — I mean, they don't —

KLEGWORTH: But really —

GLENN: It's not like they have a misunderstanding of where I stand on math with them.

KLEGWORTH: They do. Think about this. Do they know that you know that they're special? They're special people. Do they know —

GLENN: I think that might be a little condescending.

KLEGWORTH: Do they know that you know that they — if passed with cooking and appetizer, it will likely come out fairly well. Do they know that about you?

GLENN: That I know that they can cook appetizers?

KLEGWORTH: They can cook, when you cook —

GLENN: I'm not sure all of them can.

KLEGWORTH: Well, that's not really important. That's important is that they know that you know that they can cook up a wonderful spinach and artichoke dip.

PAT: So this is all about making them feel important or —

KLEGWORTH: We want to be sure that they feel good about their ability to look bruschetta.

GLENN: Let me just take this out of the real world here.

PAT: Weird.

GLENN: You know, with our associate director of Obama voter outreach.

KLEGWORTH: Yes.

GLENN: And let's use a hypothetical situation.

KLEGWORTH: Hypothetical.

GLENN: Okay. Let's say a group of people hated you because they thought that you were oppressing the rest of the world, that you were the Antichrist, the literal Antichrist, okay?

KLEGWORTH: Sure.

GLENN: They hated your way of life, they hated your religion, and it was deep. I mean, it was generational. If I said to them, hey, you're good at math and science, I don't think that's going to make a difference.

STU: Well, that could ring a little hollow. But if you were to also say you're good at social studies.

PAT: Oh.

KLEGWORTH: You're good at gym. You guys are fantastic at dodge ball and pickle ball you're at least adequate.

PAT: I don't think Obama supporters are good at dodge ball. I don't think they even play it.

KLEGWORTH: How do you know that?

PAT: Well, because it's dangerous.

KLEGWORTH: It is a little dangerous. Maybe we should ban that.

GLENN: But wait a minute, wait a minute. What if we tell them that they can play it even though it's dangerous; that's how good they are?

PAT: Ah.

GLENN: It's not dangerous for them.

PAT: Hmmm, that might be good.

KLEGWORTH: That's pretty good.

PAT: You like that?

KLEGWORTH: I like that.

PAT: I mean, you are the outreach guy.

KLEGWORTH: I am.

GLENN: You go out and keep that outreach.

PAT: Make that happen.

GLENN: I think new Obama supporters are going to start coming, watching and listening to the show every day with this kind of —

KLEGWORTH: It's important to focus on this, Glenn. Like, for example, we have started an outreach program directly to Sean Penn and we said, "I am Sam" was adequate. You did a good job in that movie. It was a good job of acting. It wasn't —

PAT: Have you seen I am Sam?

KLEGWORTH: No, no, of course not.

PAT: Nobody did, but you just want to make him feel good about his performance.

GLENN: But I don't think that's going to make him a fan of me or even a supporter or even tolerate me.

KLEGWORTH: Well, it's certainly not believable if you tell him he is good at math because there's no way Sean Penn has come to addition in a good way.

Has anybody else noticed how politicized sports have gotten? The NFL is practically three berets away from a socialist revolution. They seem more concerned with dismantling social norms and protesting than with playing football. The Minnesota Vikings announced yesterday they will host a summit and fundraiser for LGBTQ inclusion in sports.

According to LifeSiteNews, the LGBTQ inclusion summit will "include speeches, interviews, and panel discussions with a variety of athletes, coaches, and activists who are homosexual or transgender" and "will be hosted at the team's recently-completed TCO Performance Center."

The summit marks the latest in the NFL's continued advocacy for LGBTQ rights and initiatives. Last year, the league launched NFL Pride, in a bid to "heighten sensitivity to the LGBTQ community" and reinforce "commitment to an inclusive environment in which all employees are welcome."

RELATED: New NFL policy will punish players who protest the national anthem

Fair enough. No one should be harassed or discriminated against in the workplace, but is that really what this is about? Because it kind of seems like there's more going on here. Kind of seems like there's a political, ideological slant to it. At the very least, it's virtue signaling.

The summit is "part of a settlement agreement the Vikings made after [former Vikings punter Chris Kluwe], who is straight, filed a lawsuit against the team in 2014 for allegedly creating a hostile work environment for homosexual and transgender people."

So, yeah, virtue signaling.

Ultimately, the NFL is a private business and, as we saw with the National Anthem kneelers, they can conduct their business however they like, and in turn the consumers can decide whether or not to keep giving them their money.

Mostly, the situation is just strange. Can you imagine how well this partnership would have gone over in the 1970s? Moreover, at what point does being LGBTQ come up during sports? How have we landed in this strange place, where politics and gender and race must be represented within every single interaction?

It's also worth mentioning that most people don't care if an athlete is gay — with the possible exception of transgender athletes, but that's another topic entirely. This tolerance has actually been confirmed by studies and surveys throughout all kinds of sports, in various countries throughout the world. Even countries with, shall we say, a far less tolerant view of the LGBTQ community than we have here in the USA — even people in those countries believe that it doesn't matter. People watch sports to see athleticism, to enjoy the unpredictable fury of sports at its finest.

People watch sports to see athleticism, to enjoy the unpredictable fury of sports at its finest.

Overwhelmingly, regardless of the sport, people do not care about the athletes' sexuality — in fact, most of us would rather not know. We don't watch golf to muse the social significance of gender norms and sexuality. We don't go to a baseball game to meditate on the evils of the patriarchy and the terrors of cultural appropriation. If an athlete is good, who cares what their orientation is? It's certainly not a new idea that LGBTQ can perform in sports. Typically, what sports fans care about is talent. Is the athlete good?

I guarantee that if Liberace rose from the dead tomorrow morning and was suddenly able to play basketball as well as 90s-era Michael Jordan, Chicago Bulls fans would not complain if he joined the team. I think it's fair to say that most people like sports better when they aren't swamped with politics. Keep the politics elsewhere, especially these days, when it's nearly impossible to escape the increasingly intolerant politics of the Left.

Perhaps they could learn a lesson from our friends, the Ancient Greeks. It's no secret that the Ancient Greeks indulged in, well, LGBTQ activities. They were quite fond of the various activities. But they also built a civilization of tremendous importance to humanity as a whole. Philosophy, art and, yes, sports. When they were charged off to war, they didn't slap a Rainbow flag bumper sticker on the back of their chariot. Their sexuality did not define their identity. They were multifaceted human beings, able to go to war or to the theater or to the town hall as a citizen, because citizenry was what mattered, personhood and selfhood. More importantly, they lived in a time when people cared about self and tribe over sexuality and gender. Identity was selfhood, not sexuality.

At the end of the day, who cares if the Minnesota Vikings want to host an LGBTQ event? But they should expect to see an increase in shoulder-padded men traipsing across the stage on Broadway.

UPDATE: Here's how the discussion went on radio. Watch the video below.

Most people like sports better when politics aren't involved

Breaking down the announcement that the Minnesota Vikings will be hosting a summit and fundraiser for LGBTQ inclusion in sports.


Stop trying to be right and think of the children

Mario Tama/Getty Images

All the outrage this week has mainly focused on one thing: the evil Trump administration and its minions who delight in taking children from their illegal immigrant parents and throwing them all in dungeons. Separate dungeons, mind you.

That makes for a nice, easy storyline, but the reality is less convenient. Most Americans seem to agree that separating children from their parents — even if their parents entered the US illegally — is a bad thing. But what if that mom and dad you're trying to keep the kids with aren't really the kids' parents? Believe it or not, fraud happens.

RELATED: Where were Rachel Maddow's tears for immigrant children in 2014?

While there are plenty of heartbreaking stories of parents simply seeking a chance for a better life for their children in the US, there are also corrupt, abusive human traffickers who profit from the illegal immigration trade. And sorting all of this out is no easy task.

This week, the Department of Homeland Security said that since October 2017, more than 300 children have arrived at the border with adults claiming to be their parents who turned out not to be relatives. 90 of these fraud cases came from the Rio Grande Valley sector alone.

In 2017, DHS reported 46 causes of fraudulent family claims. But there have already been 191 fraud cases in 2018.

Shouldn't we be concerned about any child that is smuggled by a human trafficker?

When Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen pointed out this 315 percent increase, the New York Times was quick to give these family fraud cases "context" by noting they make up less than one percent of the total number of illegal immigrant families apprehended at the southern border. Their implication was that Nielsen was exaggerating the numbers. Even if the number of fraud cases at the border was only 0.001 percent, shouldn't we be concerned about any child that is smuggled by a human trafficker?

This is the most infuriating part of this whole conversation this week (if you can call it a "conversation") — that both sides have an angle to defend. And while everyone's busy yelling and making their case, children are being abused.

What if we just tried, for two seconds, to love having mercy more than we love having to be right all the time?

Remember when cartoons were happy things? Each panel took you on a tiny journey, carrying you to an unexplored place. In Understanding Comics, Scott McCloud writes:

The comics creator asks us to join in a silent dance of the seen and the unseen. The visible and the invisible. This dance is unique to comics. No other artform gives so much to its audience while asking so much from them as well. This is why I think it's a mistake to see comics as a mere hybrid of the graphic arts and prose fiction. What happens between . . . panels is a kind of magic only comics can create.

When that magic is manipulated or politicized, it often devolves the artform into a baseless thing. Yesterday, Occupy Wall Street published the perfect example of low-brow deviation of the artform: A six-panel approach at satire, which imitates the instructions-panel found in the netted cubbyhole behind seats on airplanes. The cartoon is a critique of the recent news about immigrant children being separated from their parents after crossing the border. It is a step-by-step guide to murdering US Immigrations and Customs Enforcement agents.

RELATED: Cultural appropriation has jumped the shark, and everyone is noticing

The first panel shows a man shoving an infant into a cage meant for Pomeranians. The following five panels feature instructions, and include pictures of a cartoonish murder.

The panels read as follows:

  1. If an ICE agent tries to take your child at the border, don't panic.
  2. Pull your child away as quickly as possibly by force.
  3. Gently tell your child to close his/her eyes and ears so they won't witness what you are about to do.
  4. Grab the ICE agent from behind and push your knife into his chest with an upward thrust, causing the agent's sternum to break.
  5. Reach into his chest and pull out his still beating heart.
  6. Hold his bloody heart out for all other agents to see, and tell them that the same fate awaits them if they f--- with your child again.

Violent comics are nothing new. But most of the time, they remain in the realms of invented worlds — in other words, not in our own, with reference to actual people, let alone federal agents.

The mainstream media made a game of crying racism with every cartoon depiction of Obama during his presidency, as well as during his tenure as Senator, when the New Yorker, of all things, faced scrutiny for depicting him in "Muslim clothing." Life was a minefield for political cartoonists during the Obama era.

Chris Hondros/Getty Images

This year, we saw the leftist outrage regarding The Simpsons character Apu — a cartoon representation of a highly-respected, though cartoonishly-depicted, character on a cartoon show composed of cartoonishly-depicted characters.

We all remember Charlie Hebdo, which, like many outlets that have used cartoon satire to criticize Islam, faced the wrath and ire of people unable to see even the tamest representation of the prophet, Muhammad.

Interesting, isn't it? Occupy Wall Street publishes a cartoon that advocates murdering federal agents, and critics are told to lighten up. Meanwhile, the merest depiction of Muhammad has resulted in riots throughout the world, murder and terror on an unprecedented scale.

The intersection of Islam and comics is complex enough to have its own three-hour show, so we'll leave it at that, for now. Although, it is worth mentioning the commentary by satirical website The Onion, which featured a highly offensive cartoon of all the major religious figures except Muhammad. It noted:

Following the publication of the image above, in which the most cherished figures from multiple religious faiths were depicted engaging in a lascivious sex act of considerable depravity, no one was murdered, beaten, or had their lives threatened.

Of course, Occupy Wall Street is free to publish any cartoon they like. Freedom of speech, and so on—although there have been several instances in which violent cartoons were ruled to have violated the "yelling fire in a crowded theater" limitation of the First Amendment.

Posting it to Twitter is another issue — this is surely in violation of Twitter's violent content policy, but something tells me nothing will come of it. It's a funny world, isn't it? A screenshot of a receipt from Chick-fil-A causes outrage but a cartoon advocating murder gets crickets.

RELATED: Twitter mob goes ballistic over Father's Day photo of Caitlyn Jenner. Who cares?

In Understanding Comics, Scott McCloud concludes that, "Today the possibilities for comics are — as they've always been — endless. Comics offers . . . range and versatility, with all the potential imagery of film and painting plus the intimacy of the written word. And all that's needed is the desire to be heard, the will to learn, and the ability to see."

Smile, and keep moving forward.

Crude and awful as the Occupy Wall Street comic is, the best thing we can do is nod and look elsewhere for the art that will open our eyes. Let the lunatics draw what they want, let them stew in their own flawed double standards. Otherwise, we're as shallow and empty as they are, and nothing good comes of that. Smile, and keep moving forward.

Things are getting better. Show the world how to hear, how to learn, how to see.

People should start listening to Nikki Haley

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP/Getty Images

Okay. Let's take a vote. You know, an objective, quantifiable count. How many resolutions has the UN Human Rights Council adopted condemning dictatorships? Easy. Well. How do you define "dictatorship"?

Well, one metric is the UN Human Rights Council Condemnation. How many have the United Nations issued to China, with a body count higher than a professional Call of Duty player?

Zero.

How about Venezuela, where socialism is devouring its own in the cruelest, most unsettling ways imaginable?

Zero.

And Russia, home of unsettling cruelty and rampant censorship, murder and (actual) homophobia?

Zero.

Iraq? Zero. Turkey? Iraq? Zero. Cuba? Zero. Pakistan? Zero.

RELATED: Nikki Haley just dropped some serious verbal bombs on Russia at the UN

According to UN Human Rights Council Condemnations, 2006-2016, none of these nations is as dangerous as we'd imagined. Or, rather, none of them faced a single condemnation. Meanwhile, one country in particular has faced unbelievable scrutiny and fury — you'll never guess which country.

No, it's not Somalia. It's Israel. With 68 UN Human Rights Council Condemnations! In fact, the number of total United Nations condemnations against Israel outnumbers the total of condemnations against all other countries combined. The only country that comes close is Syria, with 15.

The Trump administration withdrew from the United Nations Human Rights Council on Tuesday in protest of what it perceives as an entrenched bias against Israel and a willingness to allow notorious human rights abusers as members.

In an address to the UN Security Council on Tuesday, Nikki Haley said:

Let's remember that the Hamas terrorist organization has been inciting violence for years, long before the United States decided to move our embassy. This is what is endangering the people of Gaza. Make no mistake, Hamas is pleased with the results from yesterday... No country in this chamber would act with more restraint than Israel has.

Maybe people should start listening to Haley. Hopefully, they will. Not likely, but there's no crime in remaining hopeful.