Bernanke said what?

GLENN: There you go. By the way, Ben Bernanke gave a speech today I think in Florida, if I'm not mistaken. He gave a speech today. Listen to this. If this doesn't -- and Stu, I want you to listen to this. Tell me what this says to you. This is the head of the Fed.

STU: Yes, sir.

GLENN: Now remember, you're like, we're not in a recession.

STU: No, we're not. No, we're not technically.

GLENN: I mean, you might believe we're going that way but we're not.

STU: What does (mumbling) We're not. There's no disagreeing with that. It hasn't happened yet. It may be happening but it hasn't occurred.

GLENN: Let's just say when the job numbers come out, what is it, next week or a couple of weeks, when the job numbers come out and we see the job numbers, I think the next job numbers or the ones after it we can officially call this a recession. Let's just say we're in a recession.

STU: Is that how it's measured? A recession is not measured by job numbers.

GLENN: Well, that is part of it.

STU: I mean, it's certainly part --

GLENN: Because there's no growth.

STU: Well, and that's an indicator but that's not --

GLENN: Okay.

STU: I'm just trying to make sure you're factual here.

GLENN: Yeah, yeah, whatever.

STU: Just trying to help.

GLENN: Let me ask you this because you're like, oh, Mr. Doomsday man. Tell me how else you would interpret what Ben Bernanke said today. Ben Bernanke said, I believe -- try this on for size -- I believe that banks should consider just rewriting the mortgages that are sketchy, that people are having trouble with, rewriting them to a lower amount. So in other words, if you took out a $400,000 mortgage, it's now, the bank is just going to call you up and go, you know what, you're having a hard time; you only owe is $200,000.

STU: Not a lower interest rate.

GLENN: Not a lower interest rate. Not even what Clinton says, you know, I'm going to freeze interest rates, I'm going to freeze everything, I'm going to make you only -- I'm going to let you only pay the interest for an extended period of time. None of that. This is, I believe the banks should consider lowering the amount of loan that they have to pay back.

STU: Not even, not enforcing them to do it. Like one of the Democrats' proposals was forcing them to have a judge to be able to write down. Not even that.

GLENN: Ben Bernanke's saying the banks should really consider that.

STU: I'm sure they have considered it and then they took three seconds and then they moved on to something else.

GLENN: So let me ask you. The chairman of the Fed says that but also says, you know, looks like we might be headed for a recession but, you know, I don't know, I don't know. He's at the same time saying maybe the banks should just cut everybody's loans. What? That's insane!

STU: Sounds like a terrible idea. I mean, to me --

GLENN: Does that also sound like maybe some people think it might be a little worse than what everybody is saying? It's not like, boy, it's been a really bad Tuesday. You know, it's like having a slow day in your bakery. I grew up in a bakery and it would be like my dad saying, boy, it's been an awfully slow Tuesday; we should sell our car. I'm like, what?

STU: It does -- I mean, clearly they are talking about obvious problems, particularly in housing and in relationship to the banks. I think there's just some validity to the idea that banks, it would be in their best interest to not let everyone default. And that's part of it. It's like if you are going to have all these people default, it's in their best interest to -- not the Government telling them to do it but they themselves saying I'd rather not just write all this down.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: I'd rather get some of this money.

GLENN: Now, let me ask you this question. How does --

STU: I'm loving, I'm loving the condescension here. It's outside of the glass.

GLENN: No, no, no.

STU: It's a little bit different, a little different word kind of but it's coming out fantastically so far.

GLENN: Not to you, it's really not. It's really not. I'm just trying to understand, I'm trying -- Stu, we had this conversation last night on, I can't understand how people think any of this stuff is logical. I can't understand. So let me ask you this question, and I'm looking for an honest answer. If somebody can answer this, this is great.

STU: Sure.

GLENN: How does anybody think that saying the banks should take a $400,000 mortgage and just say, you know what, let's call it $200,000. That $200,000 has got to come from some place and that some place is somebody that invested that money. So it's not just the bank. It's the person that was investing in the bank, shareholders and everybody else. Who thinks it's logical that money's just not going to completely dry up when people are like, wait a minute, you just cut what you owed me in half, you just cut my -- you just cut my profits in half. It doesn't just affect the bank. There's little old me, too.

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.

We've heard a lot about critical race theory lately, and for good reason: It's a racist ideology designed to corrupt our children and undermine our American values. But most of what we see are the results of a process that has been underway for decades. And that's not something the mainstream media, the Democrat Party, and even teachers unions want you to know. They're doing everything in their power to try and convince you that it's no big deal. They want to sweep everything under the rug and keep you in the dark. To fight it, we need to understand what fuels it.

On his Wednesday night special this week, Glenn Beck exposes the deep-seated Marxist origins of CRT and debunks the claims that it's just a harmless term for a school of legal scholarship. Newsweek opinion editor Josh Hammer joins to argue why we must ban critical race theory from our schools if we want to save a very divided nation.

Watch the full "Glenn TV" episode 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.