Glenn Beck: Oscar buzz (zzz)

GLENN: Now I'm a little sleepy today because I was up for the Oscars. I, I can't ‑‑

PAT: Man, I was watching them until 12:30 last night.

GLENN: I watched until ‑‑

PAT: Hoping they would come back for an encore but they didn't.

GLENN: They didn't. I stayed up, too.

PAT: Hacked me off.

GLENN: I couldn't go to bet.

PAT: No.

GLENN: Without nothing who was going to win.

PAT: After that, The Hurt Locker won, you know. So ‑‑

GLENN: I didn't watch a second of them. I don't care. I just have to point out that this is what I tweeted last night because I went upstairs and I was doing some reading and everything and I got online and I saw, oh, it's raining, what was it on the Drudge? Rain in Hollywood. And I'm like, oh, it's raining on their parade. And then, you know, I saw that the best picture, is it going to be Avatar or Hurt Locker? So this is what I tweeted last night. I tweeted, oh, Hollywood, what to do, what to do? An anti‑U.S. human movie versus an anti‑U.S. troops movie. My guess is Hollywood goes with the anti‑U.S. troops movie because the other movie made too much profit.

STU: That's right. You want to take the failure.

GLENN: Hurt Locker.

PAT: You are exactly right.

STU: The financial failure of people that aren't artists don't understand.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: That's got to be the choice.

GLENN: Who doesn't want to see Hurt Locker seriously? I mean, besides everybody in America and quite possibly the planet and everybody who's also blue on other planets.

PAT: I watched it four times last night.

STU: Did you really? I'm sure it might be very well done and everything but again, do we really need more antiwar movies?

GLENN: I think we got the point from Hollywood.

STU: I don't think it's possible.

GLENN: Just run the other ones that we haven't watched. Just rename them. We won't go to that one, either.

PAT: How do we know they didn't do that with this? They might have.

GLENN: They could have.

PAT: This might actually be that Tom Cruise movie that failed so badly.

GLENN: I don't know.

PAT: I don't know.

GLENN: It could be. I'm looking forward to it. Now, I did see two movies this weekend. I haven't gone to the movie theater in a long time. I saw two movies this week even. I saw ‑‑ oh, jeez. I don't even know it was a Roman Polanski movie. I was the guy, if you were at the movie theater and it said at the very end, directed by Roman Polanski and you heard a guy go, oh, jeez, that was me.

STU: Glenn Beck supports child molesters.

GLENN: Yeah, I didn't even, I didn't know it was a Roman Polanski movie until then and I saw that and I went, oh, jeez.

STU: You didn't know. That's the excuse of the day, is it, sir?

GLENN: Yeah, it is. It's great.

STU: What movie was it?

GLENN: I don't want to ‑‑

STU: So I can know what one not to go to.

GLENN: Ghost Rider. Ghost Rider. It was great.

STU: Yeah, won't be supporting Roman. I don't care if it's the greatest movie ever created.

GLENN: You've got it in some sort of pirate bootlegged, something like that. I don't know if I bought kiddie porn or what's going to happen now, but it was a great movie. And then the other one I saw was Alice in Wonderland? Classic. That is ‑‑

STU: I can't believe how much money that made.

GLENN: Wizard of Oz classic.

PAT: $116 million, I think?

STU: Yeah.


GLENN: Did you see it?

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: Did you agree?

PAT: Yes. You know, I'm not a big fan of the ‑‑ I'm not a big fan of the story itself.

GLENN: Neither am I. I thought it actually worked this time. That was the closest I've ever thought that worked.

PAT: Yeah. They did it well. It's really well done.

GLENN: Really well done.

PAT: It was really good.

GLENN: I like Tim Burton but I've never thought he had a commercial hit. I've never looked at Tim Burton and said, oh, that's going to be a great, you know, that, oh, that was a great show, everybody will love it. I always like his vision, but I always think he misses heart. He never connects with the heart. This one he did. It's great.

PAT: Did you see, what was that other one? The Corpse Bride was kind of a hard movie.

GLENN: Oh, I didn't see that one.

PAT: Did you see that one? You might like that one.

GLENN: Oh, yeah, yeah, I did see that one. No, I still thought he missed it.

PAT: Did you?

GLENN: I thought it was close, but he always misses it.

STU: He's had a lot of huge hit movies.

PAT: He has.

GLENN: No, no, but he's never ‑‑ I mean, if you are a fan of Tim Burton, you probably know what I mean. He's ‑‑ I thought the closest he ever came to it was Edward Scissorhands.

STU: All of his movies are Edward Scissorhands, though. All of them are the same.

PAT: They are dark.

GLENN: Yeah, they are. But they don't usually, they just miss the heart just by this much. They just are just slightly off. And ‑‑ but he's ‑‑

PAT: This one had it, though. He did.

GLENN: Oh, it was great.

PAT: Johnny Depp is a tremendous actor.

GLENN: He is the best actor I think of our generation.

PAT: Probably is.

STU: Really?

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: I don't know.

PAT: It's really good.

GLENN: I hated Willy Wonka and the chocolate factory.

STU: Terrible job with that, and that was Tim Burton, too.

PAT: Was that Tim Burton?

GLENN: Yeah, yeah.

PAT: It was awful.

GLENN: Awful. I couldn't get past, all I wanted to think of the whole time during Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory was, hee, hee.

PAT: Oh, Michael Jackson?

GLENN: Michael Jackson chocolate factory.

STU: That is the story. It's a creepy story. But it's a great movie.

GLENN: No, it was creepier.

STU: There's nobody creepier than Gene Wilder in that movie.

GLENN: Oh, no.

STU: That is one of the creepiest roles.

GLENN: Gene Wilder, you never thought about him saying, hey, let's go to the fizzy lift area and maybe you and I... you never thought of that.

STU: I thought of him as bizarrely asexual in that movie.

GLENN: What did you say?

STU: In Gene Wilder. Like he was so weird that the thought of sex had never crossed his mind in his entire life. He could have been a Roman Polanski ‑‑

GLENN: No, it was Michael Jackson.

PAT: Right.

GLENN: I thought he felt like Michael Jackson. Not that I know what Michael Jackson feels like. You know what I mean?

STU: You mean the Peter Pan Michael Jackson or the Peter Pan Michael Jackson? You know what I mean? Like the one that maybe ‑‑

GLENN: What is the difference between Peter ‑‑

PAT: That's horrifying. I don't know what you're saying.

STU: There was the Peter Pan that the sort of ‑‑

PAT: Stu?

STU: Like, he didn't care, he just really loved children? Or that he loved the children?

GLENN: Oh, no, he loved the children.

STU: That's what I'm saying. I never got that from Wilder.

GLENN: Love was a verb, yeah. And I didn't get that from Gene Wilder, you are right. I did get it from Johnny Depp.

STU: Creepy.

GLENN: But this one is great. This one's great. You'll love this.

STU: How ‑‑ this is the biggest, what, biggest opening of all time? Or biggest 3‑D of all time?

PAT: Biggest 3‑D of all time. Biggest march ‑‑

GLENN: Can we stop with the 3‑D thing?

STU: Avatar's the biggest movie of all time and had a bigger opening. But that's pretty significant.

PAT: It won't in the long run but probably, yes, the first night.

GLENN: I don't know, man. I would take my kids to this. You know what?

PAT: It's the biggest movie ever released with the name Alice in the title by far: By far.

STU: Bigger than the Diner series?

PAT: Yes, yes.

GLENN: The ‑‑ I think this has legs to it. I think this is ‑‑ I think this is like Wizard of Oz. This is as classic ‑‑

PAT: You think it might beat Avatar?

GLENN: No.

PAT: It won't beat Avatar.

GLENN: Avatar is PG, or PG‑13.

PAT: And it's over $700 million now, 780 or something? It's ridiculous.

GLENN: I don't know. I was busy watching The Hurt Locker, me and those four other people watching The Hurt Locker. What a stupid ‑‑ did anybody watch ‑‑ did anybody watch the Oscars last night?

STU: I watched a little bit of it, enough to see Kathy Ireland attempt to do interviews which was one of the ‑‑ she's a beautiful woman. Not good at the job she's chosen, been chosen for.

GLENN: They were showing, they were showing some ‑‑ I heard some talk over the weekend, you know, Hollywood is worried if anybody's going to watch the Oscars. Nobody cares. Nobody cares. The only reason to watch the Oscars is to make fun of Hollywood and how out of touch they are. The Hurt Locker? You've got to be kidding me. When everybody's talking about ‑‑ now, I haven't seen Avatar. I just, I have a hard time going for the whole, you know ‑‑

PAT: Anti‑U.S. human thing.

GLENN: Yeah, yeah, yeah. And I think I can go for the anti ‑‑ like I won't see The Hurt Locker because I can't do anti‑U.S. troop thing. Anti‑U.S. human thing I'm just like, whatever. You know, for instance, the movie I saw with, you know, directed by the child molester.

STU: The ghost rider?

GLENN: Ghost rider, you know, it was anti‑waterboarding, it was anti‑CIA, anti‑American. I'm like, whatever.

STU: That just, a lot of that stuff just rolls off the shoulders at this point.

GLENN: Yeah. You are just like, "Of course it is."

PAT: Because every movie is.

GLENN: Every movie.

PAT: Nearly. Not ‑‑

GLENN: I mean, is there anything ‑‑ when do we start to get ‑‑ I think there should be another Hollywood. I think that you could really ‑‑ seriously I think you could get ‑‑ what's the guy's name from Walden Pond that made the Narnia series? What's his name? Anschutz, Phil Anschutz, the guy who said ‑‑ you don't know him? Very, very wealthy, powerful guy who just said, you know, I'm tired of movies always being crap and not having any values. And so I started Walden, is it Walden Media or Walden Pond? Walden Media. And it's made a lot of movies including the Narnia series, really well done movies. I mean, I don't know why there are not more of those. I think if more companies came out and said, hey, we're not going to insult or assault your values or the country, you are not going to have big huge blockbuster global stuff but you'll at least be ‑‑ there are people out there that want good movies that don't suck that, you know, don't assault your values. For instance, Blind Side with what's her name?

STU: Sandra Bullock.

GLENN: Sandra Bullock. She didn't win, did she?

PAT: No, she did.

GLENN: Did she really?

PAT: She really did, yeah.

GLENN: Wait a minute. She was a conservative Christian woman.

PAT: I know.

GLENN: That's unbelievable.

STU: But only in a sea of conservative Christian racists. She overcame the typical conservative racist to ‑‑ she was the only one. All of her friends couldn't believe they would allow a black man into the house. But she overcame it. So she gets the Oscar.

From the moment the 33-year-old Thomas Jefferson arrived at the Continental Congress in Philadelphia in 1776, he was on the radical side. That caused John Adams to like him immediately. Then the Congress stuck Jefferson and Adams together on the five-man committee to write a formal statement justifying a break with Great Britain, and their mutual admiration society began.

Jefferson thought Adams should write the Declaration. But Adams protested, saying, “It can't come from me because I'm obnoxious and disliked." Adams reasoned that Jefferson was not obnoxious or disliked, therefore he should write it. Plus, he flattered Jefferson, by telling him he was a great writer. It was a master class in passing the buck.

So, over the next 17 days, Jefferson holed up in his room, applying his lawyer skills to the ideas of the Enlightenment. He borrowed freely from existing documents like the Virginia Declaration of Rights. He later wrote that “he was not striving for originality of principle or sentiment." Instead, he hoped his words served as “an expression of the American mind."

It's safe to say he achieved his goal.

The five-man committee changed about 25 percent of Jefferson's first draft of the Declaration before submitting it to Congress. Then, Congress altered about one-fifth of that draft. But most of the final Declaration's words are Jefferson's, including the most famous passage — the Preamble — which Congress left intact. The result is nothing less than America's mission statement, the words that ultimately bind the nation together. And words that we desperately need to rediscover because of our boiling partisan rage.

The Declaration is brilliant in structure and purpose. It was designed for multiple audiences: the King of Great Britain, the colonists, and the world. And it was designed for multiple purposes: rallying the troops, gaining foreign allies, and announcing the creation of a new country.

The Declaration is structured in five sections: the Introduction, Preamble, the Body composed of two parts, and the Conclusion. It's basically the most genius breakup letter ever written.

In the Introduction, step 1 is the notificationI think we need to break up. And to be fair, I feel I owe you an explanation...

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another…

The Continental Congress felt they were entitled by “the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" to “dissolve the political bands," but they needed to prove the legitimacy of their cause. They were defying the world's most powerful nation and needed to motivate foreign allies to join the effort. So, they set their struggle within the entire “Course of human events." They're saying, this is no petty political spat — this is a major event in world history.

Step 2 is declaring what you believe in, your standardsHere's what I'm looking for in a healthy relationship...

This is the most famous part of the Declaration; the part school children recite — the Preamble:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That's as much as many Americans know of the Declaration. But the Preamble is the DNA of our nation, and it really needs to be taken as a whole:

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

The Preamble takes us through a logical progression: All men are created equal; God gives all humans certain inherent rights that cannot be denied; these include the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; to protect those rights, we have governments set up; but when a government fails to protect our inherent rights, people have the right to change or replace it.

Government is only there to protect the rights of mankind. They don't have any power unless we give it to them. That was an extraordinarily radical concept then and we're drifting away from it now.

The Preamble is the justification for revolution. But note how they don't mention Great Britain yet. And again, note how they frame it within a universal context. These are fundamental principles, not just squabbling between neighbors. These are the principles that make the Declaration just as relevant today. It's not just a dusty parchment that applied in 1776.

Step 3 is laying out your caseHere's why things didn't work out between us. It's not me, it's you...

This is Part 1 of the Body of the Declaration. It's the section where Jefferson gets to flex his lawyer muscles by listing 27 grievances against the British crown. This is the specific proof of their right to rebellion:

He has obstructed the administration of justice...

For imposing taxes on us without our consent...

For suspending our own legislatures...

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us...

Again, Congress presented these “causes which impel them to separation" in universal terms to appeal to an international audience. It's like they were saying, by joining our fight you'll be joining mankind's overall fight against tyranny.

Step 4 is demonstrating the actions you took I really tried to make this relationship work, and here's how...

This is Part 2 of the Body. It explains how the colonists attempted to plead their case directly to the British people, only to have the door slammed in their face:

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury...

They too have been deaf to the voice of justice... We must, therefore... hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

This basically wrapped up America's argument for independence — we haven't been treated justly, we tried to talk to you about it, but since you refuse to listen and things are only getting worse, we're done here.

Step 5 is stating your intent — So, I think it's best if we go our separate ways. And my decision is final...

This is the powerful Conclusion. If people know any part of the Declaration besides the Preamble, this is it:

...that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved...

They left no room for doubt. The relationship was over, and America was going to reboot, on its own, with all the rights of an independent nation.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The message was clear — this was no pitchfork mob. These were serious men who had carefully thought through the issues before taking action. They were putting everything on the line for this cause.

The Declaration of Independence is a landmark in the history of democracy because it was the first formal statement of a people announcing their right to choose their own government. That seems so obvious to us now, but in 1776 it was radical and unprecedented.

In 1825, Jefferson wrote that the purpose of the Declaration was “not to find out new principles, or new arguments, never before thought of… but to place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm… to justify ourselves in the independent stand we are compelled to take."

You're not going to do better than the Declaration of Independence. Sure, it worked as a means of breaking away from Great Britain, but its genius is that its principles of equality, inherent rights, and self-government work for all time — as long as we actually know and pursue those principles.

On June 7, 1776, the Second Continental Congress met in Philadelphia at the Pennsylvania State House, better known today as Independence Hall. Virginia delegate Richard Henry Lee introduced a motion calling for the colonies' independence. The “Lee Resolution" was short and sweet:

Resolved, That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved.

Intense debate followed, and the Congress voted 7 to 5 (with New York abstaining) to postpone a vote on Lee's Resolution. They called a recess for three weeks. In the meantime, the delegates felt they needed to explain what they were doing in writing. So, before the recess, they appointed a five-man committee to come up with a formal statement justifying a break with Great Britain. They appointed two men from New England — Roger Sherman and John Adams; two from the middle colonies — Robert Livingston and Benjamin Franklin; and one Southerner — Thomas Jefferson. The responsibility for writing what would become the Declaration of Independence fell to Jefferson.

In the rotunda of the National Archives building in Washington, D.C., there are three original documents on permanent display: the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence. These are the three pillars of the United States, yet America barely seems to know them anymore. We need to get reacquainted — quickly.

In a letter to his friend John Adams in 1816, Jefferson wrote: “I like the dreams of the future, better than the history of the past."

America used to be a forward-looking nation of dreamers. We still are in spots, but the national attitude that we hear broadcast loudest across media is not looking toward the future with optimism and hope. In late 2017, a national poll found 59% of Americans think we are currently at the “lowest point in our nation's history that they can remember."

America spends far too much time looking to the past for blame and excuse. And let's be honest, even the Right is often more concerned with “owning the left" than helping point anyone toward the practical principles of the Declaration of Independence. America has clearly lost touch with who we are as a nation. We have a national identity crisis.

The Declaration of Independence is America's thesis statement, and without it America doesn't exist.

It is urgent that we get reacquainted with the Declaration of Independence because postmodernism would have us believe that we've evolved beyond the America of our founding documents, and thus they're irrelevant to the present and the future. But the Declaration of Independence is America's thesis statement, and without it America doesn't exist.

Today, much of the nation is so addicted to partisan indignation that "day-to-day" indignation isn't enough to feed the addiction. So, we're reaching into America's past to help us get our fix. In 2016, Democrats in the Louisiana state legislature tabled a bill that would have required fourth through sixth graders to recite the opening lines of the Declaration. They didn't table it because they thought it would be too difficult or too patriotic. They tabled it because the requirement would include the phrase “all men are created equal" and the progressives in the Louisiana legislature didn't want the children to have to recite a lie. Representative Barbara Norton said, “One thing that I do know is, all men are not created equal. When I think back in 1776, July the fourth, African Americans were slaves. And for you to bring a bill to request that our children will recite the Declaration, I think it's a little bit unfair to us. To ask our children to recite something that's not the truth. And for you to ask those children to repeat the Declaration stating that all men's are free. I think that's unfair."

Remarkable — an elected representative saying it wouldn't be fair for students to have to recite the Declaration because “all men are not created equal." Another Louisiana Democrat explained that the government born out of the Declaration “was used against races of people." I guess they missed that part in school where they might have learned that the same government later made slavery illegal and amended the Constitution to guarantee all men equal protection under the law. The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments were an admission of guilt by the nation regarding slavery, and an effort to right the wrongs.

Yet, the progressive logic goes something like this: many of the men who signed the Declaration of Independence, including Thomas Jefferson who wrote it, owned slaves; slavery is evil; therefore, the Declaration of Independence is not valid because it was created by evil slave owners.

It's a sad reality that the left has a very hard time appreciating the universal merits of the Declaration of Independence because they're so hung up on the long-dead issue of slavery. And just to be clear — because people love to take things out of context — of course slavery was horrible. Yes, it is a total stain on our history. But defending the Declaration of Independence is not an effort to excuse any aspect of slavery.

Okay then, people might say, how could the Founders approve the phrase “All men are created equal," when many of them owned slaves? How did they miss that?

They didn't miss it. In fact, Thomas Jefferson included an anti-slavery passage in his first draft of the Declaration. The paragraph blasted King George for condoning slavery and preventing the American Colonies from passing legislation to ban slavery:

He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights to life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating and carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere... Determined to keep open a market where men should be bought and sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce.

We don't say “execrable" that much anymore. It means, utterly detestable, abominable, abhorrent — basically very bad.

Jefferson was upset when Georgia and North Carolina threw up the biggest resistance to that paragraph. Ultimately, those two states twisted Congress' arm to delete the paragraph.

Still, how could a man calling the slave trade “execrable" be a slaveowner himself? No doubt about it, Jefferson was a flawed human being. He even had slaves from his estate in Virginia attending him while he was in Philadelphia, in the very apartment where he was writing the Declaration.

Many of the Southern Founders deeply believed in the principles of the Declaration yet couldn't bring themselves to upend the basis of their livelihood. By 1806, Virginia law made it more difficult for slave owners to free their slaves, especially if the owner had significant debts as Jefferson did.

At the same time, the Founders were not idiots. They understood the ramifications of signing on to the principles described so eloquently in the Declaration. They understood that logically, slavery would eventually have to be abolished in America because it was unjust, and the words they were committing to paper said as much. Remember, John Adams was on the committee of five that worked on the Declaration and he later said that the Revolution would never be complete until the slaves were free.

Also, the same generation that signed the Declaration started the process of abolition by banning the importation of slaves in 1807. Jefferson was President at the time and he urged Congress to pass the law.

America has an obvious road map that, as a nation, we're not consulting often enough.

The Declaration took a major step toward crippling the institution of slavery. It made the argument for the first time about the fundamental rights of all humans which completely undermined slavery. Planting the seeds to end slavery is not nearly commendable enough for leftist critics, but you can't discount the fact that the seeds were planted. It's like they started an expiration clock for slavery by approving the Declaration. Everything that happened almost a century later to end slavery, and then a century after that with the Civil Rights movement, flowed from the principles voiced in the Declaration.

Ironically for a movement that calls itself progressive, it is obsessed with retrying and judging the past over and over. Progressives consider this a better use of time than actually putting past abuses in the rearview and striving not to be defined by ancestral failures.

It can be very constructive to look to the past, but not when it's used to flog each other in the present. Examining history is useful in providing a road map for the future. And America has an obvious road map that, as a nation, we're not consulting often enough. But it's right there, the original, under glass. The ink is fading, but the words won't die — as long as we continue to discuss them.

'Good Morning Texas' gives exclusive preview of Mercury One museum

Screen shot from Good Morning Texas

Mercury One is holding a special exhibition over the 4th of July weekend, using hundreds of artifacts, documents and augmented reality experiences to showcase the history of slavery — including slavery today — and a path forward. Good Morning Texas reporter Paige McCoy Smith went through the exhibit for an exclusive preview with Mercury One's chief operating officer Michael Little on Tuesday.

Watch the video below to see the full preview.

Click here to purchase tickets to the museum (running from July 4 - 7).

Over the weekend, journalist Andy Ngo and several other apparent right-leaning people were brutally beaten by masked-gangs of Antifa protesters in Portland, Oregon. Short for "antifascist," Antifa claims to be fighting for social justice and tolerance — by forcibly and violently silencing anyone with opposing opinions. Ngo, who was kicked, punched, and sprayed with an unknown substance, is currently still in the hospital with a "brain bleed" as a result of the savage attack. Watch the video to get the details from Glenn.