Glenn Beck: POLL -- 73% say gov too powerful


The Overton Window, a thriller by Glenn Beck

GLENN: There is a new poll that is out. 62% of Americans think that the United States as a civilization is in decline. Does the government have too much power? 73% say yes. And yet, more power is coming their way. Listen to this: According to an internal U.S. citizenship and immigration service memo, it was obtained by the national review, the agency is considering ways in which it could enact meaningful immigration reform absent of legislative action. Translation? How do we give amnesty to people without having to go through congress?

What did I say a year and a half ago? Congress is going to become irrelevant. We are there. This memorandum offers administrative relief options to reduce the threat of removal for certain individuals present in the United States without authorization. Also in the absence of comprehensive immigration reform, U.S. CIS can extend benefits and/or protections to many individuals and groups by issuing new guidelines and regulations. Eastbound regulations, who oversees the regulations? Who is the one that has a ‑‑ I'm trying to remember his name, the most dangerous man in America that I've been called insane by Republicans for saying it. The most dangerous man in America is... Cass Sunstein. Why? Because he is the regulatory czar. He's the guy that will set all the regulations. What is this memo? Don't worry. You have levers. You can just turn the knob here, turn the knob here and turn the knob here and then you can, in effect, grant amnesty to people.

Now, there is a statement that has been released by the Department of Homeland Security, and here it is. Internal draft memos do not and should not be equated with any official action or policy of the government.

Hey, can I ask you a question? Is it just me, Stu? Help me out on this. Do we generate a lot of memos that are very complex that show how to do things that we would be diametrically opposed to?

STU: Not typically. It would not be a main goal of ours.

GLENN: Do you know of anybody in any business that does that? Pat, do you know anybody?

PAT: I don't think so.

GLENN: You know what? Our ‑‑ here, let me give our lawyer friend, the biggest pain in the neck, Joe Kerry, who of course ‑‑

PAT: You know what he's going to ‑‑ well, look...

GLENN: Well, I'll tell you what this means, I tell you ‑‑

PAT: It's just that...

GLENN: Chief of staff, our attorney, Joe Kerry. This is ‑‑ can you hold this conversation in confidence, Joe?

JOE: Absolutely.

GLENN: Okay, good. Joe, do you know, do you know businesses that draft complex memos on ways to do things that they are diametrically opposed to? Here it comes. Watch. Here's the attorney. He's thinking.

JOE: Well, I do think that businesses do look at things and say, okay, what are the options that we have. Who was the one that said, you know, I really didn't believe in all this stuff I wrote but we were just looking at it from an educational debate, we were just trying to look at all the angles and the sides on these issues.

GLENN: Goebbels?

STU: No.

GLENN: Who was it? I don't know. Who was it?

STU: Didn't Holdren say something like that?

JOE: Yeah, in the book that he came out in the Seventies.

GLENN: Do you believe that?

STU: Yeah, no.

GLENN: I don't believe that for a second.

STU: But, like, if you said, for example, what can we do to increase this business line and we had some sort of memo that went out that had a bunch of options, that doesn't mean you are agreeing with our options that we're supplying you.

GLENN: You wouldn't do this, you wouldn't do this: Hey, guys, we're struggling in our web business and what can we do in our web business. You would not produce a memo that says, "Porn: We should do Glenn Beck porn sites." You'd never do that.

STU: (Laughing).

GLENN: I'd fire you! I'd look at my business partner and I'd say, this guy does not get it.

STU: Right, yes.

GLENN: That's the point here. You don't issue memos and, you know, long complex memos that say, this one would be like, "And here are the pictures that we would post online and here's another link of the kind of stuff I'm thinking ‑‑ you wouldn't do that.

STU: Here are twelve resumes for the girls.

GLENN: And I've got a few of them chained in my basement right now. I'm taking photos just in case we decide to do that.

STU: They are clearly not diametrically opposed from going around the normal processes to get what they want done.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: There's certainly no ‑‑ there's no argument on that, is there? This is what they do.

GLENN: Internal memoranda: Help us do the thinking that leads to important changes. Yes. That's why you don't have, "We should do porn sites." They help us do the thinking that leads to important changes. Some of them are adopted and others are rejected. Our goal is to implement policies wisely and well to strengthen all aspects of our mission. The choices we have made so far have strengthened both the enforcement and services side of USCIS. Nobody should mistake deliberation and exchange of ideas for final decisions. To be clear, the Department of Homeland Security ‑‑ you ready? ‑‑ will not grant deferred action or humanitarian parole to the nation's entire illegal immigrant population.

See, now, this is something I've got a problem with. Something in that sentence sticks out to me: We will not grant deferred action or humanitarian parole to the nation's entire illegal immigration population. Oh, well, I feel better. Then dismiss it. They are looking for ways with Cass Sunstein to grant amnesty, and they will do it one piece at a time. What are they doing with cap and trade? It's coming, one piece at a time. What are they doing with ‑‑ we didn't just turn into a dictatorship. We didn't ‑‑ we're not turning into a communist country. Nobody's voting on, "Hey, should we take all of the wealth and give it to somebody else?" We didn't even vote on that! And if we would have voted on redistribution of wealth, we would have said no. That's why they kept it under the table. That's why when I said healthcare is nothing more than redistribution of wealth, because that's what the president said, and then he denied it. Well, as soon as he starts to appoint somebody to redistribute healthcare, they talk about openly that it, of course, must, must be redistribution of wealth. Healthcare. He wouldn't have voted for it. They do it one piece at a time. That's why Cass Sunstein is so dangerous.

This week on the Glenn Beck Podcast, Glenn spoke with Vox co-founder Matthew Yglesias about his new book, "One Billion Americans: The Case for Thinking Bigger."

Matthew and Glenn agree that, while conservatives and liberals may disagree on a lot, we're not as far apart as some make it seem. If we truly want America to continue doing great things, we must spend less time fighting amongst ourselves.

Watch a clip from the full interview with Matthew Yglesias below:


Find the full podcast on Glenn's YouTube channel or on Blaze Media's podcast network.

Want to listen to more Glenn Beck podcasts?

Subscribe to Glenn Beck's channel on YouTube for FREE access to more of his masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, or subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

'A convenient boogeyman for misinformation artists': Why is the New York Times defending George Soros?

Image source: Simon Dawson/Bloomberg via Getty Images

On the "Glenn Beck Radio Program" Tuesday, Glenn discussed the details of a recent New York Times article that claims left-wing billionaire financier George Soros "has become a convenient boogeyman for misinformation artists who have falsely claimed that he funds spontaneous Black Lives Matter protests as well as antifa, the decentralized and largely online, far-left activist network that opposes President Trump."

The Times article followed last week's bizarre Fox News segment in which former House Speaker Newt Gingrich appeared to be censored for criticizing Soros (read more here). The article also labeled Glenn a "conspiracy theorist" for his tweet supporting Gingrich.

Watch the video clip below for details:


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 former ambassador to Russia under the Obama Administration, Michael McFaul, came up with "7 Pillars of Color Revolution," a list of seven steps needed to incite the type of revolution used to upend Eastern European countries like Ukraine and Georgia in the past two decades. On his TV special this week, Glenn Beck broke down the seven steps and showed how they're happening right now in America.

Here are McFaul's seven steps:

1. Semi-autocratic regime (not fully autocratic) – provides opportunity to call incumbent leader "fascist"

2. Appearance of unpopular president or incumbent leader

3. United and organized opposition – Antifa, BLM

4. Effective system to convince the public (well before the election) of voter fraud

5. Compliant media to push voter fraud narrative

6. Political opposition organization able to mobilize "thousands to millions in the streets"

7. Division among military and police


Glenn explained each "pillar," offering examples and evidence of how the Obama administration laid out the plan for an Eastern European style revolution in order to completely upend the American system.

Last month, McFaul made a obvious attempt to downplay his "color revolutions" plan with the following tweet:

Two weeks later, he appeared to celebrate step seven of his plan in this now-deleted tweet:



As Glenn explains in this clip, the Obama administration's "7 Pillars of Color Revolution" are all playing out – just weeks before President Donald Trump takes on Democratic candidate Joe Biden in the November election.

Watch the video clip below to hear more from Glenn:


Watch the full special "CIVIL WAR: The Way America Could End in 2020" here.

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 multiplatform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Start your free trial and get $20 off a one-year subscription with code BANTHIS.

Modern eugenics: Will Christians fight this deadly movement?

Photo by Olga Kononenko on Unsplash

Last month, without much fanfare, a new research paper disclosed that 94 percent of Belgian physicians support the killing of new-born babies after birth if they are diagnosed with a disability.

A shocking revelation indeed that did not receive the attention it demanded. Consider this along with parents who believe that if their unborn babies are pre-diagnosed with a disability, they would choose to abort their child. Upwards of 70 percent of mothers whose children are given a prenatal disability diagnosis, such as Down Syndrome, abort to avoid the possibility of being burdened with caring for a disabled child.

This disdain for the disabled hits close to home for me. In 1997, my family received a letter from Michael Schiavo, the husband of my sister, Terri Schiavo, informing us that he intended to petition a court to withdraw Terri's feeding tube.

For those who do not remember, in 1990, at the age of 26, Terri experienced a still-unexplained collapse while at home with Michael, who subsequently became her legal guardian. Terri required only love and care, food and water via feeding tube since she had difficulty swallowing as a result of her brain injury. Nonetheless, Michael's petition was successful, and Terri's life was intentionally ended in 2005 by depriving her of food and water, causing her to die from dehydration and starvation. It took almost two excruciating weeks.

Prior to my sister's predicament, the biases that existed towards persons with disabilities had been invisible to me. Since then, I have come to learn the dark history of deadly discrimination towards persons with disabilities.

Indeed, some 20 years prior to Germany's T4 eugenics movement, where upwards of 200,000 German citizens were targeted and killed because of their physical or mental disability, the United States was experiencing its own eugenics movement.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas documented some of this history in his concurring opinion in Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky, Inc., Justice Thomas describes how eugenics became part of the academic curriculum being taught in upwards of 400 American universities and colleges.

It was not solely race that was the target of the U.S. eugenics movement. Eugenicists also targeted the institutionalized due to incurable illness, the physically and cognitively disabled, the elderly, and those with medical dependency.

In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down Roe v. Wade, which wiped out pro-life laws in nearly every state and opened the floodgates to abortion throughout the entirety of pregnancy. Since then, 60 million children have been killed. Abortion as we know it today has become a vehicle for a modern-day eugenics program.

Since the Catholic Church was established, the Truth of Christ was the greatest shield against these types of attacks on the human person and the best weapon in the fight for equality and justice. Tragically, however, for several decades, the Church has been infiltrated by modernist clergy, creating disorder and confusion among the laity, perverting the teachings of the Church and pushing a reckless supposed “social justice" agenda.

My family witnessed this firsthand during Terri's case. Church teaching is clear: it is our moral obligation to provide care for the cognitively disabled like Terri. However, Bishop Robert Lynch, who was the bishop of the Diocese of St. Petersburg, Florida, during Terri's case, offered no support and was derelict in his duties during the fight for Terri's life.

Bishop Lynch had an obligation to use his position to protect Terri from the people trying to kill her and to uphold Church teaching. Indeed, it was not only the silence of Bishop Lynch but that of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), which also remained silent despite my family's pleas for help, that contributed to Terri being needlessly starved and dehydrated to death.

My family's experience, sadly, has turned out to be more of the rule than the exception. Consider what happened to Michael Hickson. Hickson was a 36-year-old, brain-injured person admitted to a Texas hospital after contracting COVID-19. Incredibly—and against the wishes of Michael's wife—the hospital decided not to treat Michael because they arbitrarily decided that his “quality of life" was “unacceptably low" due to his pre-existing disability. Michael died within a week once the decision not to treat him was imposed upon him despite the efforts of his wife to obtain basic care for her husband.

During my sister's case and our advocacy work with patients and their families, it would have been helpful to have a unified voice coming from our clergy consistently supporting the lives of our medically vulnerable. We desperately need to see faithful Catholic pastoral witness that confounds the expectations of the elite by pointing to Jesus Christ and the moral law.

A Church that appears more concerned with baptizing the latest social and political movements is a Church that may appear to be “relevant," but one that may also find itself swallowed up by the preoccupations of our time.

As Catholics, we know all too well the reluctance of priests to preach on issues of abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide, and other pro-life issues. We have heard that the Church cannot risk becoming too political.

At the same time, some within the Church are now openly supporting Black Lives Matter, an organization that openly declares itself hostile to the family, to moral norms as taught by the Church, and whose founders embrace the deadly ideology of Marxism.

For example, Bishop Mark J. Seitz of El Paso, Texas, knelt in prayer with a cardboard sign asserting his support for this ideology.

Recently, during an online liturgy of the mass, Fr. Kenneth Boller at The Church of St. Francis Xavier in New York, led the congregation with what appears to sound like questions affirming the BLM agenda. Moreover, while reading these questions, pictures of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and Ahmaud Arbery, assumed victims of racial injustice, were placed on the altar of St. Francis Xavier Church, a place typically reserved for Saints of the Catholic Church.

Contrast these two stories with what happened in the Diocese of Lafayette, Indiana, where Rev. Theodore Rothrock of St. Elizabeth Seton Church fell victim to the ire of Bishop Timothy Doherty. Fr. Rothrock used strong language in his weekly church bulletin criticizing the Black Lives Matter movement and its organizers. Consequently, Bishop Doherty suspended Fr. Rothrock from public ministry.

In 1972, Pope Pius VI said, “The smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God." It seems that too many of our clergy today are enjoying the smell.

I encourage all who are concerned about the human right to life and about Christ-centered reforms in our culture and our Church to raise your voices for pastoral leadership in every area of our shared lives as Christian people.

Bobby Schindler is a Senior Fellow with Americans United for Life, Associate Scholar at the Charlotte Lozier Institute, and President of the Terri Schiavo Life & Hope Network.