Glenn Beck: Sherrod mess gets messier

GLENN: This Sherrod story is, as I pointed out last night on TV, I love this story because the way that the way the English say this is a charade, I won't play this charade anymore, they pronounce it Sherrod and it is becoming a Sherrod, is it not?

This is if this wasn't a setup, I have to tell you, it is, it is certainly Rahm Emanuel's don't let a good crisis go to waste. This is truly, truly becoming fascinating to see how this whole thing is coming together. We're looking at the timeline. Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity now are being blamed, they were dooped by FOX News. They were dooped by that evil FOX News. Those shows hadn't aired. Let me say it again. They hadn't aired when the President fired Sherrod.

Now, so, how is he did the President have, like, time tunnel? Did he, like, beam into the future and he's, like, I just got back from the future. Is that what happened? Did he get into a DeLorean, go to the future, see how what they were going to say, then come back, 88.6 miles an hour, and then come out and say, I've got to fire her? But, Doc, but, Doc, I don't think we should fire her!

How exactly did was he dooped and influenced by FOX News when those shows hadn't aired? I'm trying to figure that one out and I can't do it. Now she is she's practically set up a tent at CNN. Now, here is a whom who sued the Federal Government and won $13 million and then found herself working for the Federal Government. Now she's got, I believe, the largest lawsuit known to mankind, not against not against me or FOX or anybody. She's got the biggest lawsuit known to mankind against the Federal Government, calling Cloward and Piven, calling Cloward and Piven, come in, Cloward and Piven.

PAT: Can you say President Sherrod?

GLENN: Uh huh, sure.

PAT: I think you could. She threw herself right into the presidency. Own the country, run the country. She's all set. She's all set.

GLENN: No, she's not. What's weird is Robert Gates yesterday said or Gibbs, yeah. Robert Gibbs said yesterday that he had called and they had apologized.

PAT: Uh huh.

GLENN: Right?

PAT: Yeah, yeah.

GLENN: Do you have the audio?

PAT: Yeah.

GIBBS: I think this is one I think this is a fair way to put it. Members of this administration, members of the media, members of different political factions on both sides of this have all made determinations and judgments without a full set of facts. I think that is, that is wholly and completely accurate. I think, without a doubt, Ms. Sherrod is owed an apology. I would do so, certainly, on behalf of this administration. I think if we learn if we look back and decide what we want to learn out of this, I think it is, as I said, everybody involved

GLENN: Edit.

GIBBS: made determinations without knowing all the facts.

PAT: Everybody involved acted without knowing all of the facts.

GLENN: My gosh. It's a it's really quite amazing, isn't it?

PAT: I'm thinking not everyone acted without knowing the facts. For instance, we didn't we didn't mention it on Monday on radio nor did you mention it on Monday night on television.

GLENN: No, yeah. Not Monday.

PAT: Not Monday night. Yeah, Tuesday.

GLENN: Tuesday.

PAT: And when you did, you took her side.

GLENN: On Tuesday morning I still was unaware of the story, the complete story, hadn't seen the video. I think we played the audio here and to me it was just another example of what we're seeing over and over again.

PAT: Uh huh.

GLENN: But I don't even know if the NAACP had come out had they come out with a statement condemning her yet?

PAT: I think toward the end of the show on Tuesday, yeah, they had and then there's starting to be some question, very quickly after that about

GLENN: I remember

PAT: about this story being 24 years ago.

GLENN: I remember she came out about 11:30 on Tuesday, she came out and said she was asked to resign because she was going to be on Glenn Beck and we talked about that and so we haven't even we hadn't even talked about it on TV. We hadn't even talked about it. And by the time, then, noon came around and I remember I came back in there at 12:15 because I was in the news room and I came in and I said, Okay, I'm looking at the story now. There's something wrong here. There's something really, really wrong here, but do you know what? If anybody wants to say, well, how come you know, how come Sean Hannity was doing this at night, at 9:00 o'clock at fight? He took it out of context. Why would you? Why would you do any work on this story? As a journalist, why would you do any work on this? I mean, if we're doing the job journalists are doing now, why do any work? The President had already decided that she was a racist. He fired her. The administration fired her. This administration doesn't fire anybody for being a communist or a racist. They don't do any of that stuff. So, the President if the President decides that an African American come is a racist, that's news in and of itself. So, how can anyone blame anyone for saying, well, they were sloppy. Look what they did. They tore her apart? The President, by the time those shows aired, the President had already deemed her a racist. I mean, oh, okay. So, you're having a problem that Sean Hannity dog piled on the pile that the President put out and the NAACP. Oh, okay. I can't figure that one out. Well, you can't just follow the President. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm going blind and I think it's because of statements like that. I think it is. I think I've been praying, Lord, I can't look at it anymore. I think he's answering a prayer because I can't take it.

I mean, you've got to be kidding me. This is where you're going? You can't just follow the President. You've got to look at it yourself. What?

Most self-proclaimed Marxists know very little about Marxism. Some of them have all the buzzwords memorized. They talk about the exploits of labor. They talk about the slavery of capitalist society and the alienation caused by capital. They talk about the evils of power and domination.

But they don't actually believe what they say. Or else they wouldn't be such violent hypocrites. And we're not being dramatic when we say "violent."

For them, Marxism is a political tool that they use to degrade and annoy their political enemies.

They don't actually care about the working class.

Another important thing to remember about Marxists is that they talk about how they want to defend the working class, but they don't actually understand the working class. They definitely don't realize that the working class is composed mostly of so many of the people they hate. Because, here's the thing, they don't actually care about the working class. Or the middle class. They wouldn't have the slightest clue how to actually work, not the way we do. For them, work involves ranting about how work and labor are evil.

Ironically, if their communist utopia actually arrived, they would be the first ones against the wall. Because they have nothing to offer except dissent. They have no practical use and no real connection to reality.

Again ironically, they are the ultimate proof of the success of capitalism. The fact that they can freely call for its demise, in tweets that they send from their capitalistic iPhones, is proof that capitalism affords them tremendous luxuries.

Their specialty is complaining. They are fanatics of a religion that is endlessly cynical.

They sneer at Christianity for promising Heaven in exchange for good deeds on earth — which is a terrible description of Christianity, but it's what they actually believe — and at the same time they criticize Christianity for promising a utopia, they give their unconditional devotion to a religion that promises a utopia.

They are fanatics of a religion that is endlessly cynical.

They think capitalism has turned us into machines. Which is a bad interpretation of Marx's concept of the General Intellect, the idea that humans are the ones who create machines, so humans, not God, are the creators.

They think that the only way to achieve the perfect society is by radically changing and even destroying the current society. It's what they mean when they say things about the "status quo" and "hegemony" and the "established order." They believe that the system is broken and the way to fix it is to destroy, destroy, destroy.

Critical race theory actually takes it a step farther. It tells us that the racist system can never be changed. That racism is the original sin that white people can never overcome. Of course, critical race theorists suggest "alternative institutions," but these "alternative institutions" are basically the same as the ones we have now, only less effective and actually racist.

Marx's violent revolution never happened. Or at least it never succeeded. Marx's followers have had to take a different approach. And now, we are living through the Revolution of Constant Whining.

This post is part of a series on critical race theory. Read the full series here.

Americans are losing faith in our justice system and the idea that legal consequences are applied equally — even to powerful elites in office.

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) joined Glenn Beck on the radio program to detail what he believes will come next with the Durham investigation, which hopefully will provide answers to the Obama FBI's alleged attempts to sabotage former President Donald Trump and his campaign years ago.

Rep. Nunes and Glenn assert that we know Trump did NOT collude with Russia, and that several members of the FBI possibly committed huge abuses of power. So, when will we see justice?

Watch the video clip below:


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.

The corporate media is doing everything it can to protect Dr. Anthony Fauci after Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) roasted him for allegedly lying to Congress about funding gain-of-function research in Wuhan, China.

During an extremely heated exchange at a Senate hearing on Tuesday, Sen. Paul challenged Dr. Fauci — who, as the director of the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases, oversees research programs at the National Institute of Health — on whether the NIH funded dangerous gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Dr. Fauci denied the claims, but as Sen. Paul knows, there are documents that prove Dr. Fauci's NIH was funding gain-of-function research in the Wuhan biolab before COVID-19 broke out in China.

On "The Glenn Beck Program," Glenn and Producer Stu Burguiere presented the proof, because Dr. Fauci's shifting defenses don't change the truth.

Watch the video clip below:

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.

Critical race theory: A special brand of evil

wal_172619/Pixabay

Part of what makes it hard for us to challenge the left is that their beliefs are complicated. We don't mean complicated in a positive way. They aren't complicated the way love is complicated. They're complicated because there's no good explanation for them, no basis in reality.

The left cannot pull their heads out of the clouds. They are stuck on romantic ideas, abstract ideas, universal ideas. They talk in theories. They see the world through ideologies. They cannot divorce themselves from their own academic fixations. And — contrary to what they believe and how they act — it's not because leftists are smarter than the rest of us. And studies have repeatedly shown that leftists are the least happy people in the country. Marx was no different. The Communist Manifesto talks about how the rise of cities "rescued a considerable part of the population from the idiocy of rural life."

Studies have repeatedly shown that leftists are the least happy people in the country.

Instead of admitting that they're pathological hypocrites, they tell us that we're dumb and tell us to educate ourselves. Okay, so we educate ourselves; we return with a coherent argument. Then they say, "Well, you can't actually understand what you just said unless you understand the work of this other obscure Marxist writer. So educate yourselves more."

It's basically the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, the idea that when you point out a flaw in someone's argument, they say, "Well, that's a bad example."

After a while, it becomes obvious that there is no final destination for their bread-crumb trail. Everything they say is based on something that somebody else said, which is based on something somebody else said.

Take critical race theory. We're sure you've noticed by now that it is not evidence-based — at all. It is not, as academics say, a quantitative method. It doesn't use objective facts and data to arrive at conclusions. Probably because most of those conclusions don't have any basis in reality.

Critical race theory is based on feelings. These feelings are based on theories that are also based on feelings.

We wanted to trace the history of critical race theory back to the point where its special brand of evil began. What allowed it to become the toxic, racist monster that it is today?

Later, we'll tell you about some of the snobs who created critical theory, which laid the groundwork for CRT. But if you follow the bread-crumb trail from their ideas, you wind up with Marxism.

For years, the staff has devoted a lot of time to researching Marxism. We have read a lot of Marx and Marxist writing. It's part of our promise to you to be as informed as possible, so that you know where to go for answers; so that you know what to say when your back is up against the wall. What happens when we take the bread-crumb trail back farther, past Marxism? What is it based on?

This is the point where Marxism became Marxism and not just extra-angry socialism.

It's actually based on the work of one of the most important philosophers in human history, a 19th-century German philosopher named Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel.

This is the point where Marxism became Marxism and not just extra-angry socialism. And, as you'll see in just a bit, if we look at Hegel's actual ideas, it's obvious that Marx completely misrepresented them in order to confirm his own fantasies.

So, in a way, that's where the bread-crumb trail ends: With Marx's misrepresentation of an incredibly important, incredibly useful philosophy, a philosophy that's actually pretty conservative.

This post is part of a series on critical race theory. Read the full series here.