73% say government too powerful, who is Cass Sunstein

73% say government too powerful

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





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.

http://media.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/43671/