Glenn Beck: 1932 All Over Again?




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

Congress couldn't agree on a budget, but don't worry about that. House Democrats have "deemed" the new $1.1 trillion budget as passed. "Deem and pass" allows Democrats to start spending money in 2011 without having to follow any real budget.

Meanwhile, President Obama's budget director, Peter Orszag, is now leaving the White House. He said, "I want to emphasize that it would be inaccurate to say that I have told the president personally that I'm leaving because of concerns about our fiscal policy."

Hmm. That's odd.

And former Clinton Labor Secretary and Obama economic adviser Robert Reich just came out and said: "The economy is still in the gravitational pull of the Great Recession — all the booster rockets for getting us beyond it are failing"

So big government is failing spectacularly and after a year and a half of Obama, it's starting to feel like 1932:

The average time needed to find a job has risen to a record 35.2 weeks

The budget deficit is above 10 percent of GDP

Home sales are down

Retail sales are down

9.2 million people are unemployed

But despite all of this, President Obama is taking a victory lap around the country. He's calling it "Recovery Summer." That's about as ridiculous as if BP went around the country right now to promote their environmental safety record. It doesn't add up.

History shows us, time and again, that big government spending is simply not the answer to national economic problems. But, here we go again down the big government path.

How does it keep happening?

Part of the problem is we have too many politicians like Pete Stark from California. Stark is a founding member of the Progressive Caucus and, as I showed you last week, he embodies everything about progressives we told you about: They think they are better than you.

Last week Stark was mocking the Minutemen over border security. Now listen to him in this interview with journalist Jan Helfeld about the national debt:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. PETE STARK, D-CALIF.: The national debt measures the wealth.

(CROSSTALK)

STARK: The wealthier we are —

JAN HELFELD, JOURNALIST: The larger the national debt, the wealthier we are?

STARK: It's an indication of the wealth of the country. You're right.

HELFELD: So the more you owe, the more you're worth?

STARK: In federal accounting — in the national scheme of things, that's quite right.

HELFELD: So why shouldn't we borrow another trillion then next year?

STARK: Probably because — we should not necessarily borrow another trillion, but we will, inevitably.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

First of all, if you don't believe progressives think you are too stupid and have to be dragged to the right answers, just remember that clip. Secondly, more debt means we are wealthy? At the time of this clip the national debt was about $5 trillion. We're almost three times that amount now. We're rich! Where did we go wrong?

Stark went on to say this:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STARK: Did you ever study economics?

HELFELD: A little bit.

STARK: Where?

HELFELD: In the University of Puerto Rico.

STARK: Oh the University of Puerto Rico? Do you have a doctorate in economics?

HELFELD: No, I don't.

STARK: A master's degree?

HELFELD: No, I don't.

STARK: How many classes did you take? What I would suggest —

(CROSSTALK)

STARK: They are simple-minded questions that don't relate to the realities —

(CROSSTALK)

STARK: If you would shut up for a minute. You're blabbing away here about something you don't know anything about.

HELFELD: I am just trying to ask a question —

STARK: You're making a lot of stupid statements, Jan.

HELFELD: So you think if the national debt increases, we become wealthier. So I don't see why you don't want to go for it — and go for two or three billion dollars —

STARK: It's why you probably never graduated from a very good college, Jan. And I'm not going to take the trouble to educate you here.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

I'd like to explain this to Congressman Stark and others who think like him. I'll speak slowly for the congressman. He should probably TiVo this — TiVo is a device that records TV shows and you can play it back. I didn't know if he knew that because he's been in Congress for 37 years now, so it's been a long time since he won that first election, in which his main complaint against his opponent was that he'd been in Congress too long.

Take an imaginary neighborhood with "diverse" economic backgrounds:

Person One makes $250,000 a year. They owe $500,000 on a $520,000 mortgage, they financed a $20,000 boat, a sports car and a summer cottage on the lake as well. Life is sweet. They don't have a lot of savings — they'll do that later.

Person Two only makes $45,000 a year. But, they've paid off their mortgage, they bought used cars and have no payments. They've saved money for a rainy day.

Now, the way Congressman Stark sees it, the richest person on the block is the guy with the boat and the sports car. After all, he's got the nicest stuff and the biggest house. But, what happens if they both lose their jobs and have to take one of those jobs that Americans just won't do? Or what if their income is significantly cut back?

Well, when that rainy day comes, the richest person on the block is the person only making $45,000 a year. Why? Well, they don't have lots of stuff, but they don't owe anyone either. There's no bank or credit card company breathing down their necks if their income is slashed. Their life changes, of course, but not as much as the rich guy with all the financed stuff. He's got to scramble to sell the house, the boat, the car. When he can't, banks and credit card companies are coming after him. He could borrow more money to try and keep up, but what has that done? Made him wealthier or just more in debt? All it does is buy some time before it all comes crashing down.

It's the same with the federal government. If IRS returns drop and they continue to try and make up for the shortfall by printing more money or borrowing more money, we just fall deeper into debt.

We're not wealthier. We've only held off the inevitable. But, then again, I'm not a doctor like the great congressman. Oh wait, he's not a doctor? And I almost forgot — I am. But it doesn't take a doctorate to read some history. It's not hard to see that we are repeating the same mistakes of the past. We are repeating the 1930s:

The Dow appears to be repeating the patterns seen during the Great Depression. After the crash in 1929, there was a brief recovery period in 1930. On July 8, 1932, the Dow bottomed out — closing the day at 41.22, an 89 percent drop from its pre-crash high; in October of 2008 stock market plummets 2,400 points in nine days

President Hoover responded by increasing federal spending by 50 percent between 1929 until the end of his term; George W. Bush abandoned the free market system to save the free market system

Unemployment over 20 percent by the end of Hoover's term; Unemployment was over 7 percent at the end of Bush — up from the 4.5 percent range

In 1932, Hoover increased top income tax rates from 25 percent to 63 percent; Obama is increasing top tax rates from 35 to 39 percent

FDR's policies included making unions stronger, regulating price controls, interfering with business and paying higher wages than the amount of productivity justified; Obama's "life work" is SEIU's life work. Obama has fired CEOs of companies and taken control of automakers and banks

FDR tried to revive economy with massive government spending and entitlements with the New Deal; Obama has tried to revive economy with massive government spending and expansion of entitlements with the stimulus, cash-for-clunkers, health care and financial reform, plus the takeover of student loan industry

Unemployment remained unresponsive and stayed stubbornly high throughout the New Deal and New Deal II; unemployment under Obama has gone up and stayed there, completely flat-lining despite the government "injections"

FDR blamed Hoover for the economic problems; Obama still blames Bush for "creating the mess" he has to "mop" up

In 1935, the Supreme Court struck down the NRA and in 1936, the court struck down the Agriculture Adjustment Act; today, 60 percent want a repeal of health care. Will the courts follow through?

In 1946, a successful GOP campaign "had enough" of Democrats; today, Tea Parties, whose universal issue is 'stop spending'

So we've followed Hoover and FDR almost step-for-step. Are we going to bottom out again and extend this slump just like FDR did? Well, we have to understand that there are critical differences between the 1930s and today:

Back then, the country had manufacturing. We could build ships, planes, tanks, etc.; today, we can't

Back then, our citizens didn't have crippling debt; today, we do

Back then, our grandparents saved their money; today, we don't

Maybe we could get someone really smart like Pete Stark to explain it to us. Oh wait, I forgot: It's people like Pete Stark who got us into this mess.

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

On Wednesday's TV show, Glenn Beck sat down with radio show host, author, political commentator, and film critic, Michael Medved.

Michael had an interesting prediction for the 2020 election outcome: a brokered convention by the DNC will usher in former First Lady Michelle Obama to run against President Donald Trump.

Watch the video below to hear why he's making this surprising forecast:

Use code BECK 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.

On Thursday's "Glenn Beck Radio Program," BlazeTV's White House correspondent Jon Miller described the current situation in Virginia after Gov. Ralph Northam (D) declared a state of emergency and banned people carrying guns at Capitol Square just days before a pro-Second-Amendment rally scheduled on Martin Luther King Jr. Day.

Jon told Glenn that Gov. Northam and the Virginia Legislature are "trying to deprive the people of their Second Amendment rights" but the citizens of Virginia are "rising up" to defend their constitutional rights.

"I do think this is the flashpoint," Jon said. "They [Virginia lawmakers] are saying, 'You cannot exercise your rights ... and instead of trying to de-escalate the situation, we are putting pressure. We're trying to escalate it and we're trying to enrage the citizenry even more'."

Glenn noted how Gov. Northam initially blamed the threat of violence from Antifa for his decision to ban weapons but quickly changed his narrative to blame "white supremacists" to vilify the people who are standing up for the Second Amendment and the Constitution.

"What he's doing is, he's making all all the law-abiding citizens of Virginia into white supremacists," Glenn said.

"Sadly, that's exactly right," Jon replied. "And I think he knows exactly what he's doing."

Watch the video to catch more of the conversation below:

Use code BECK 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.

Ryan: Trump Louisiana Finale

Photo by Jim Dale

Part One. Part Two. Part Three.

At the end of Trump rallies, I would throw on my Carhartt jacket, sneak out of the press area, then blend in with everyone as they left, filing out through swinging doors.

Often, someone held the door open for me. Just 30 minutes earlier, the same person had most likely had most likely hissed at me for being a journalist. And now they were Sunday smiles and "Oh, yes, thank you, sir" like some redneck concierge.

People flooded out of the arena with the stupidity of a fire drill mishap, desperate to survive.

The air smacked you as soon as you crossed the threshold, back into Louisiana. And the lawn was a wasteland of camping chairs and coolers and shopping bags and to-go containers and soda cans and articles of clothing and even a few tents.

In Monroe, in the dark, the Trump supporters bobbled over mounds of waste like elephants trying to tiptoe. And the trash was as neutral to them as concrete or grass. They plodded over it because it, an object, had somehow gotten in their way.

It did not matter that they were responsible for this wreckage.Out in the sharp-edged moonlight, rally-goers hooted and yapped and boogied and danced, and the bbq food truck was all smoke and paper plates.

They were even more pumped than they had been before the rally, like 6,000 eight year olds who'd been chugging Mountain Dew for hours. Which made Donald Trump the father, the trooper, God of the Underworld, Mr. Elite, Sheriff on high horse, the AR-15 sticker of the family.

Ritualistic mayhem, all at once. And, there in Louisiana, Trump's supporters had gotten a taste of it. They were all so happy. It bordered on rage.

Still, I could not imagine their view of America. Worse, after a day of strange hostilities, I did not care.

My highest priority, my job as a reporter, was to care. To understand them and the world that they inhabit. But I did not give a damn and I never wanted to come back.

Worst of all, I would be back. In less than a week.

Was this how dogs felt on the 4th of July? Hunched in a corner while everyone else gets drunk and launches wailing light into the sky? configurations of blue and red and white.

It was 10:00 p.m. and we'd been traveling since 11:00 a.m., and we still had 5 hours to go and all I wanted was a home, my home, any home, just not here, in the cold sweat of this nowhere. Grey-mangled sky. No evidence of planes or satellites or any proof of modern-day. Just century-old bridges that trains shuffled over one clack at a time.

And casinos, all spangles and neon like the 1960s in Las Vegas. Kitchy and dumb, too tacky for lighthearted gambling. And only in the nicer cities, like Shreveport, which is not nice at all.

And swamp. Black water that rarely shimmered. Inhabited by gadflies and leeches and not one single fish that was pretty.

Full of alligators, and other killing types. The storks gnawing on frogs, the vultures never hungry. The coyotes with nobody to stop them and so much land to themselves. The roaches in the wild, like tiny wildebeests.

Then, the occasional deer carcass on the side of the road, eyes splayed as if distracted, tongue out, relaxed but empty. The diseased willows like skeletons in hairnets. The owls that never quit staring. A million facets of wilderness that would outlive us all.

Because Nature has poise. It thrives and is original.

Because silence is impossible. Even in an anechoic chamber, perfectly soundproofed, you can hear your own heartbeat, steady as a drum. A never-ending war.

I put "Headache" by Grouper on repeat as we glided west. We were deadlocked to asphalt, rubber over tarface.

And I thought about lines from a Rita Dove poem titled "I have been a stranger in a strange land"

He was off cataloging the universe, probably,
pretending he could organize
what was clearly someone else's chaos.

Wasn't that exactly what I was doing? Looking for an impossible answer, examining every single accident, eager for meaning? telling myself, "If it happens and matters the next year, in America, I want to be there, or to know what it means. I owe it to whoever cares to listen."

Humans are collectors and I had gone overboard.

Because maybe this wasn't even my home. These landmarks, what did they mean? Was I obvious here? When I smiled, did I trick them into believing that I felt some vague sense of approval? Or did my expressions betray me?

Out in all that garbage-streaked emptiness — despite the occasional burst of passing halogen — I couldn't tell if everything we encountered was haunted or just old, derelict, broken, useless. One never-ending landfill.

Around those parts, they'd made everything into junk. Homes. Roads. Glass. Nature. Life itself, they made into junk.

I cringed as we passed yet another deer carcass mounded on the side of the road.

As written in Job 35:11,

Who teaches us more than the beasts of the earth and makes us wiser than the birds in the sky?

Nobody. Look at nature and you feel something powerful. Look at an animal, in all of its untamable majesty, and you capture a deep love, all swept up in the power of creation. But, here, all I saw were poor creatures who people had slammed into and kept driving. Driving to where? For what reason? What exactly was so important that they left a trail of dead animals behind them?

So I crossed myself dolorously and said an "Our Father" and recited a stanza from Charles Bukowski's "The Laughing Heart"

you can't beat death but
you can beat death in life, sometimes.
and the more often you learn to do it,
the more light there will be.

Out here, nothing but darkness. Needing some light, by God. Give me something better than a Moon that hides like an underfed coward.

Jade told me about some of the more traumatic things she'd seen while working at the State Fair.

"Bro, they pull roaches out of the iced lemonade jugs and act like nothing happened."

"All right but what about the corn dogs?"

"You do not want to know, little bro."

She looked around in the quiet. "Back in the day, the Louisiana Congress refused to raise the drinking age from 18 to 21," she said. "They didn't want to lose all that drunk gambler money. So the federal government cut off funding to highways."

We glided through moon-pale landscape for an hour before I realized what she had meant. That there weren't any light poles or billboards along the road. Nothing to guide us or distract us. Just us, alone. And it felt like outer space had collapsed, swallowed us like jellybeans.

Like two teenagers playing a prank on the universe.

In the cozy Subaru Crosstrek, in the old wild night, brimming with the uncertainty of life and the nonchalance of failure, we paraded ourselves back to Dallas. Alive in the river silence that follows us everywhere.

New installments come Mondays and Thursdays. Next, the Iowa caucuses. Check out my Twitter. Email me at kryan@blazemedia.com

The Iowa primary is just around the corner, and concerns of election interference from the last presidential election still loom. Back in 2016, The Associated Press found that a majority of U.S. elections systems still use Windows 7 as an operating system, making them highly susceptible to bugs and errors. And last year, a Mississippi voter tried multiple times to vote for the candidate of his choice, but the system continuously switched his vote to the other candidate. It's pretty clear: America's voting systems desperately need an update.

That's where blockchain voting comes in.

Blockchain voting is a record-keeping system that's 100% verifiable and nearly impossible to hack. Blockchain, the newest innovation in cybersecurity, is set to grow into a $20 billion industry by 2025. Its genius is in its decentralized nature, distributing information throughout a network of computers, requiring would-be hackers to infiltrate a much larger system. Infiltrating multiple access points spread across many computers requires a significant amount of computing power, which often costs more than hackers expect to get in return.

Blockchain voting wouldn't allow for many weak spots. For instance, Voatz, arguably the leading mobile voting platform, requires a person to take a picture of their government-issued ID and a picture of themselves before voting (a feature, of course, not present in vote-by-mail, where the only form of identity verification is a handwritten signature, which is easily forgeable). Voters select their choices and hit submit. They then receive an immediate receipt of their choices via email, another security feature not present in vote-by-mail, or even in-person voting. And because the system operates on blockchain technology, it's nearly impossible to tamper with.

Votes are then tabulated, and the election results are published, providing a paper trail, which is a top priority for elections security experts.

The benefits of blockchain voting can't be dismissed. Folks can cast their vote from the comfort of their homes, offices, etc., vastly increasing the number of people who can participate in the electoral process. Two to three-hour lines at polling places, which often deter voters, would become significantly diminished.

Even outside of the voting increase, the upsides are manifold. Thanks to the photo identification requirements, voter fraud—whether real or merely suspected—would be eliminated. The environment would win, too, since we'd no longer be wasting paper on mail-in ballots. Moreover, the financial burden on election offices would be alleviated, because there's decreased staff time spent on the election, saving the taxpayer money.

From Oregon to West Virginia, elections offices have already implemented blockchain voting, and the results have been highly positive. For example, the city of Denver utilized mobile voting for overseas voters in their 2019 municipal elections. The system was secure and free of technical errors, and participants reported that it was very user-friendly. Utah County used the same system for their 2019 primary and general elections. An independent audit revealed that every vote that was cast on the app was counted and counted correctly. These successful test cases are laying the groundwork for even larger expansions of the program in 2020.

With this vital switch, our elections become significantly more secure, accurate, and efficient. But right now, our election infrastructure is a sitting duck for manipulation. Our current lack of election integrity undermines the results of both local and national elections, fans the flames of partisanship, and zaps voter confidence in the democratic system. While there's never a silver bullet or quick fix to those kinds of things, blockchain voting would push us much closer to a solution than anything else.

Chris Harelson is the Executive Director at Prosperity Council and a Young Voices contributor.