GLENN: We fixed the banking problem.
STU: Friday banking crisis solved, right?
GLENN: Yes.
STU: So California, today California problem. Tomorrow, California bailout.
GLENN: Solved.
STU: Wednesday, California solved. Why don’t we just pass bailouts for everything, then everything would be solved.
GLENN: I love this idea. May I tell you, I’m coming up with my own — now we have the disclaimer? Hang on. The lawyers are making us do this.
VOICE: The financial opinions expressed on this program are solely the opinion of the host, which means you should immediately realize they are invalid. The radio network, this station, the United States of America and quite possibly God himself accept no responsibility for the words or actions of the host and honestly use it as an example of how not to act or think. The thoughts generated by those who follow the hosts advice should be dismissed and ridiculed at every opportunity.
GLENN: I think this is really, I think that’s a little extreme. But anyway, so I have an idea for the bailout for California because I don’t know if you know this. This is fantastic. California, you are — well, first of all, the governor just went on a $40 billion spending spree. $145 billion budget was just passed for California just recently, in the last three weeks. It’s 40 — it’s up 40% over the last five years. That’s fantastic. And here’s the best part. In this $145 billion budget that was just signed weeks ago, you know, while the whole financial thing, not a single spending cut, not one. No spending cuts. Just signed in just a couple of weeks ago. By the way, they also have the personal income tax in the state is the highest in the nation. It’s at 10.3 now. They should just raise that. People in California, they’ve got enough money. They’re living in the sunshine. What do they need a house for? They should just — 10.3, why not make it 15.8? Why not make it 20.1?
STU: Those people won’t notice the difference.
GLENN: They won’t notice.
STU: They have so much money.
GLENN: No. They have one of the 10 highest business rates for income tax at 8.3, one of the highest minimum wage requirements at $7.50, that way you don’t have any real jobs for low income workers. But don’t worry about it. You just hire an illegal. What’s the big deal there? The trial lawyers have implanted a workers’ compensation system that adds $4.13 for every $100 of payroll. That’s the second highest burden in the nation. According to the Pacific Research Institute’s tort liability index, California has the least — or is the least competitive state in all of the 50s. Oh, and it’s not a right-to-work state. So California, you got no problems going on. That’s why I would like to enact — because you’ve really done your job. You’ve done everything you can. You just pass that budget. Some would say, hey, have you cut it a little bit? No. You’ve got oil and everything else? Hey, have you sold any to make some, you know, new revenue? No. I’d like just to come with a bailout. I’m calling this the “Glenn Beck Go to Hell, California Act of 2008,” and it’s really pretty simple. Until you cut your budget, until you, you know, stop making people just have — this is what they did over the weekend. They made sure that all of the fast food restaurants had the calorie counts up there. You know, no, they’re prioritizing. They made sure that that was all done this weekend. So until you stop doing things like that, until you slash your budget, until you stop giving money away to everybody, until you start to say, “Hey, wait a minute, don’t we have a gigantic source of revenue just off our shores,” until you start doing that, you can go to hell.
Now, some might say, you know, why would I want to go to Massachusetts, and I just want to say that’s not — no, no, no, that’s not — I mean, it may seem like hell but it’s not actually hell. Now, people on the other side of the country, they say, have you been to Massachusetts? And I say, yes, I have been. It looks like hell. The people who are running it seem like they’re from hell, but they’re not — that’s not technically hell. California, until you do those other things, I’d like to send you directly to… hell. Now, some others in California, many in let’s say, I don’t know, San Diego might say (laughing), can’t go there, I’m already living there and I say, no, no, it could get much worse for you. Yes, it could. The people who are running you right now, you might think, they’re worse than Satan? Yes, yes, believe it or not, Satan could be worse than the people in Sacramento. I’m just — now, that’s just, this is just, it’s only a three-page bill right now. We could add more to it. I don’t think we do — do you have any amendments, Stu, that you’d like to add?
STU: Well, it’s kind of — what you are saying is perplexing because first of all I don’t understand. I mean, you should at least have 448 more pages of just pork projects. Like carbon tax, maybe something like you can work in there like some wool research.
GLENN: Hold it just a second. You are not saying that in the bill that just passed just last week, the one that was rushed through congress real quick, you are not saying that now that we’ve done our research over the weekend that we found that there is the beginnings of a carbon tax.
STU: No. Why would I say something — are you Ling to me? Why would I say something like that?
GLENN: That’s what we found over the weekend, that in that bill that was just passed and signed by the President, there is the foundation of a carbon tax. Because that would be crazy.
STU: It would be crazy.
GLENN: Yeah.
STU: No one would say that.
GLENN: Okay, good.
STU: But what I’m saying is you —
GLENN: But wait. You are not not saying that, though, either. Have you noticed that? I think Stu is not saying that but he’s not not saying that, either.
STU: Yeah, I have no —
GLENN: It almost makes me say, gee, maybe somebody should look into that bill because there’s a hidden carbon tax in it!
STU: Couldn’t possibly be true.
GLENN: Couldn’t possibly be, no.
STU: But GLENN, you are missing the whole premise of this conversation.
GLENN: Yes.
STU: You are saying that California should go to hell because —
GLENN: No, no, no, I’m not saying that. It would be law.
STU: It’s a proposed — right, it’s a proposal.
GLENN: It would be law, they would have to go.
STU: Right. You know, despite the fact there’s a lot of people there who think their government is as insane as we do. The point there, though, is —
GLENN: They mainly live in San Diego.
STU: Right, yes, that’s — at least seems to be the pattern.
GLENN: It’s the only part of the — I think they own all of the flags in the State of California, are in San Diego.
STU: Right.
GLENN: You don’t see an American flag anywhere except San Diego.
STU: I don’t think that’s accurate but it’s at least —
GLENN: Pretty close.
STU: Here’s the thing, Glenn.
GLENN: Yes.
STU: Okay. Why would we go, why would we make California go to hell when we can — if a bailout is going to solve the problem? Remember the premise. You have a problem, you pass a bailout, then the problem’s solved.
GLENN: I’m just being a stickler. I’m just being a stickler.
STU: Why, though?
GLENN: I’m just trying to be obstinate. It’s what talk radio does. It makes people hate people. When there’s a solution out there, I’ve just got to hate people, whip people up into hatred.
STU: This is an easy solution.
GLENN: I know.
STU: Just give the money away and —
GLENN: I know, but Stu, we’re out of business. I’ve got to whip people up into hate. Even though that solution is so simple because we have fixed the bank — oh, the Dow is down 208. We fixed the whole economic problem. By the way, by the way, now Massachusetts has come on board. Massachusetts has also said that they are going to need a bailout.
STU: Gee, that’s smart because they know bailouts solve problems. Every time —
GLENN: No, STU, I have a — may I, I have another bill I’d like to introduce. It’s the “Glenn Beck Go to Hell Massachusetts Act of 2008″. It’s a lot like the” Glenn Beck Go to Hell California Act of 2008″ except instead of oil off the shore, I just remind Massachusetts that they have a lot of wind power off their shore that might — you know, they could — I know you don’t want to wreck your view, Massachusetts, but — and people in Massachusetts are like, how are we going to go to hell? What are you talking about? Why would I want to go to New York City? And they say, no, no, no. No, no, people in Massachusetts, you think that New York City is hell. Technically it’s not. Hell is much, much worse than — and I know this is hard to believe. Being a guy who lives here in New York City, I know it’s very, very difficult to believe, but hell is technically worse than New York City. Although Bloomberg may be the antichrist. I’m not — I’m just saying, he may be Satan himself. I’m not sure. We’ll have to check into that. But until you cut your budget, you know, because Massachusetts, the great thing about you is you wanted to do healthcare. So you did this whole healthcare thing and then it just spiraled out of control. As many would say, the whole healthcare thing, really not a good idea. You know, the whole spending and taxing, really not a good — you are driving people out of your state. Kind of like California is. So until you decide, yeah, going to lower my taxes, I’m going to make it more business friendly, I’m going to, you know, just not, you know, just tax people to death and then spend people, you know, so they can’t even afford the grave, after they’ve been taxed to death, they can’t even afford the grave, and you wouldn’t dig a grave because that will hurt the, you know, beloved environment. You picked that one up from California, by the way. Here’s what you do. You can just go to hell. And then I would like to introduce the last act because New York City is now talking about a bailout, too. And that one is the “Glenn Beck, Holy Cow, I Think We’re Already in Hell Act of 2008.” And that one is just, you have nothing, New York. You can’t really do anything because what you’ve done is you hate the rich so much, you’ve taught everybody to hate the rich and you’ve built all of your tax base in the entire state around Wall Street, the rich people. And then what’s crazy is you have people like Barney Frank coincidentally enough from Massachusetts, and he — they send him down to monitor the whole, you know, banking thing along with Chris Dodd who is weird, this is a guy who represents a lot of the people who live in Greenwich and places like that, you know, the big bankers and stuff. And you just hate those rich and so what you’ve done is you’ve created a system where the rich can’t function anymore. So now the rich are gone. They are beating it. And there’s no money being made on, buy all these rich people down on Wall Street. So now there are no more rich people here. So you don’t have the money for the — maybe you should tax those people who make under $250,000 — no, that won’t cover it. Hmmm. Maybe we shouldn’t have put all of our eggs into one rich basket. Maybe we should have created a system where we spread the burden across the entire spectrum so if one goes down, we don’t lose the whole ship. No, that would be crazy. What we should do is eat the rich, which by the way I believe if there is a total meltdown, people in New York will be eating not only the rich but their neighbors within 10 days. Oh, they will be feasting on the old lady who lives in 19-B within 10 days of a meltdown because the people in this city are completely unprepared. Of course, they will go after the old lady’s probably cat within four days because they won’t have any — and they won’t be able to get down the 70 flights of stairs. And so the old lady will be, “Where’s Fluffy? Has anybody seen Fluffy?” And the people will be munching on Fluffy right there in 18-D. And as the old lady comes out, “Where’s Fluffy,” somebody will say in 18-C, “I knew we could lure her out just by making cat noises in the hallway,” and they’ll eat her in New York City because, yes, New York City is hell.
So Californians, if you would like to live in New York City, just keep doing what you’re doing because it’s working out well here.
Glenn Beck: Problem solved! Not
Pacific Research Institute
GLENN: We fixed the banking problem.
STU: Friday banking crisis solved, right?
GLENN: Yes.
STU: So California, today California problem. Tomorrow, California bailout.
GLENN: Solved.
STU: Wednesday, California solved. Why don’t we just pass bailouts for everything, then everything would be solved.
GLENN: I love this idea. May I tell you, I’m coming up with my own — now we have the disclaimer? Hang on. The lawyers are making us do this.
VOICE: The financial opinions expressed on this program are solely the opinion of the host, which means you should immediately realize they are invalid. The radio network, this station, the United States of America and quite possibly God himself accept no responsibility for the words or actions of the host and honestly use it as an example of how not to act or think. The thoughts generated by those who follow the hosts advice should be dismissed and ridiculed at every opportunity.
GLENN: I think this is really, I think that’s a little extreme. But anyway, so I have an idea for the bailout for California because I don’t know if you know this. This is fantastic. California, you are — well, first of all, the governor just went on a $40 billion spending spree. $145 billion budget was just passed for California just recently, in the last three weeks. It’s 40 — it’s up 40% over the last five years. That’s fantastic. And here’s the best part. In this $145 billion budget that was just signed weeks ago, you know, while the whole financial thing, not a single spending cut, not one. No spending cuts. Just signed in just a couple of weeks ago. By the way, they also have the personal income tax in the state is the highest in the nation. It’s at 10.3 now. They should just raise that. People in California, they’ve got enough money. They’re living in the sunshine. What do they need a house for? They should just — 10.3, why not make it 15.8? Why not make it 20.1?
STU: Those people won’t notice the difference.
GLENN: They won’t notice.
STU: They have so much money.
GLENN: No. They have one of the 10 highest business rates for income tax at 8.3, one of the highest minimum wage requirements at $7.50, that way you don’t have any real jobs for low income workers. But don’t worry about it. You just hire an illegal. What’s the big deal there? The trial lawyers have implanted a workers’ compensation system that adds $4.13 for every $100 of payroll. That’s the second highest burden in the nation. According to the Pacific Research Institute’s tort liability index, California has the least — or is the least competitive state in all of the 50s. Oh, and it’s not a right-to-work state. So California, you got no problems going on. That’s why I would like to enact — because you’ve really done your job. You’ve done everything you can. You just pass that budget. Some would say, hey, have you cut it a little bit? No. You’ve got oil and everything else? Hey, have you sold any to make some, you know, new revenue? No. I’d like just to come with a bailout. I’m calling this the “Glenn Beck Go to Hell, California Act of 2008,” and it’s really pretty simple. Until you cut your budget, until you, you know, stop making people just have — this is what they did over the weekend. They made sure that all of the fast food restaurants had the calorie counts up there. You know, no, they’re prioritizing. They made sure that that was all done this weekend. So until you stop doing things like that, until you slash your budget, until you stop giving money away to everybody, until you start to say, “Hey, wait a minute, don’t we have a gigantic source of revenue just off our shores,” until you start doing that, you can go to hell.
Now, some might say, you know, why would I want to go to Massachusetts, and I just want to say that’s not — no, no, no, that’s not — I mean, it may seem like hell but it’s not actually hell. Now, people on the other side of the country, they say, have you been to Massachusetts? And I say, yes, I have been. It looks like hell. The people who are running it seem like they’re from hell, but they’re not — that’s not technically hell. California, until you do those other things, I’d like to send you directly to… hell. Now, some others in California, many in let’s say, I don’t know, San Diego might say (laughing), can’t go there, I’m already living there and I say, no, no, it could get much worse for you. Yes, it could. The people who are running you right now, you might think, they’re worse than Satan? Yes, yes, believe it or not, Satan could be worse than the people in Sacramento. I’m just — now, that’s just, this is just, it’s only a three-page bill right now. We could add more to it. I don’t think we do — do you have any amendments, Stu, that you’d like to add?
STU: Well, it’s kind of — what you are saying is perplexing because first of all I don’t understand. I mean, you should at least have 448 more pages of just pork projects. Like carbon tax, maybe something like you can work in there like some wool research.
GLENN: Hold it just a second. You are not saying that in the bill that just passed just last week, the one that was rushed through congress real quick, you are not saying that now that we’ve done our research over the weekend that we found that there is the beginnings of a carbon tax.
STU: No. Why would I say something — are you Ling to me? Why would I say something like that?
GLENN: That’s what we found over the weekend, that in that bill that was just passed and signed by the President, there is the foundation of a carbon tax. Because that would be crazy.
STU: It would be crazy.
GLENN: Yeah.
STU: No one would say that.
GLENN: Okay, good.
STU: But what I’m saying is you —
GLENN: But wait. You are not not saying that, though, either. Have you noticed that? I think Stu is not saying that but he’s not not saying that, either.
STU: Yeah, I have no —
GLENN: It almost makes me say, gee, maybe somebody should look into that bill because there’s a hidden carbon tax in it!
STU: Couldn’t possibly be true.
GLENN: Couldn’t possibly be, no.
STU: But GLENN, you are missing the whole premise of this conversation.
GLENN: Yes.
STU: You are saying that California should go to hell because —
GLENN: No, no, no, I’m not saying that. It would be law.
STU: It’s a proposed — right, it’s a proposal.
GLENN: It would be law, they would have to go.
STU: Right. You know, despite the fact there’s a lot of people there who think their government is as insane as we do. The point there, though, is —
GLENN: They mainly live in San Diego.
STU: Right, yes, that’s — at least seems to be the pattern.
GLENN: It’s the only part of the — I think they own all of the flags in the State of California, are in San Diego.
STU: Right.
GLENN: You don’t see an American flag anywhere except San Diego.
STU: I don’t think that’s accurate but it’s at least —
GLENN: Pretty close.
STU: Here’s the thing, Glenn.
GLENN: Yes.
STU: Okay. Why would we go, why would we make California go to hell when we can — if a bailout is going to solve the problem? Remember the premise. You have a problem, you pass a bailout, then the problem’s solved.
GLENN: I’m just being a stickler. I’m just being a stickler.
STU: Why, though?
GLENN: I’m just trying to be obstinate. It’s what talk radio does. It makes people hate people. When there’s a solution out there, I’ve just got to hate people, whip people up into hatred.
STU: This is an easy solution.
GLENN: I know.
STU: Just give the money away and —
GLENN: I know, but Stu, we’re out of business. I’ve got to whip people up into hate. Even though that solution is so simple because we have fixed the bank — oh, the Dow is down 208. We fixed the whole economic problem. By the way, by the way, now Massachusetts has come on board. Massachusetts has also said that they are going to need a bailout.
STU: Gee, that’s smart because they know bailouts solve problems. Every time —
GLENN: No, STU, I have a — may I, I have another bill I’d like to introduce. It’s the “Glenn Beck Go to Hell Massachusetts Act of 2008″. It’s a lot like the” Glenn Beck Go to Hell California Act of 2008″ except instead of oil off the shore, I just remind Massachusetts that they have a lot of wind power off their shore that might — you know, they could — I know you don’t want to wreck your view, Massachusetts, but — and people in Massachusetts are like, how are we going to go to hell? What are you talking about? Why would I want to go to New York City? And they say, no, no, no. No, no, people in Massachusetts, you think that New York City is hell. Technically it’s not. Hell is much, much worse than — and I know this is hard to believe. Being a guy who lives here in New York City, I know it’s very, very difficult to believe, but hell is technically worse than New York City. Although Bloomberg may be the antichrist. I’m not — I’m just saying, he may be Satan himself. I’m not sure. We’ll have to check into that. But until you cut your budget, you know, because Massachusetts, the great thing about you is you wanted to do healthcare. So you did this whole healthcare thing and then it just spiraled out of control. As many would say, the whole healthcare thing, really not a good idea. You know, the whole spending and taxing, really not a good — you are driving people out of your state. Kind of like California is. So until you decide, yeah, going to lower my taxes, I’m going to make it more business friendly, I’m going to, you know, just not, you know, just tax people to death and then spend people, you know, so they can’t even afford the grave, after they’ve been taxed to death, they can’t even afford the grave, and you wouldn’t dig a grave because that will hurt the, you know, beloved environment. You picked that one up from California, by the way. Here’s what you do. You can just go to hell. And then I would like to introduce the last act because New York City is now talking about a bailout, too. And that one is the “Glenn Beck, Holy Cow, I Think We’re Already in Hell Act of 2008.” And that one is just, you have nothing, New York. You can’t really do anything because what you’ve done is you hate the rich so much, you’ve taught everybody to hate the rich and you’ve built all of your tax base in the entire state around Wall Street, the rich people. And then what’s crazy is you have people like Barney Frank coincidentally enough from Massachusetts, and he — they send him down to monitor the whole, you know, banking thing along with Chris Dodd who is weird, this is a guy who represents a lot of the people who live in Greenwich and places like that, you know, the big bankers and stuff. And you just hate those rich and so what you’ve done is you’ve created a system where the rich can’t function anymore. So now the rich are gone. They are beating it. And there’s no money being made on, buy all these rich people down on Wall Street. So now there are no more rich people here. So you don’t have the money for the — maybe you should tax those people who make under $250,000 — no, that won’t cover it. Hmmm. Maybe we shouldn’t have put all of our eggs into one rich basket. Maybe we should have created a system where we spread the burden across the entire spectrum so if one goes down, we don’t lose the whole ship. No, that would be crazy. What we should do is eat the rich, which by the way I believe if there is a total meltdown, people in New York will be eating not only the rich but their neighbors within 10 days. Oh, they will be feasting on the old lady who lives in 19-B within 10 days of a meltdown because the people in this city are completely unprepared. Of course, they will go after the old lady’s probably cat within four days because they won’t have any — and they won’t be able to get down the 70 flights of stairs. And so the old lady will be, “Where’s Fluffy? Has anybody seen Fluffy?” And the people will be munching on Fluffy right there in 18-D. And as the old lady comes out, “Where’s Fluffy,” somebody will say in 18-C, “I knew we could lure her out just by making cat noises in the hallway,” and they’ll eat her in New York City because, yes, New York City is hell.
So Californians, if you would like to live in New York City, just keep doing what you’re doing because it’s working out well here.
Nothing contained in this blog is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of the Pacific Research Institute or as an attempt to thwart or aid the passage of any legislation.