This is a rush transcript from "Glenn Beck," August 24, 2009. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
GLENN BECK, HOST: Today is day number one of a special series we're calling "New Republic." And, I mean, this is not a happy new republic; America is rapidly being transformed. And if you're like me: Hello, my name is Glenn and I was kind of addicted to the old republic.
Before we're turning to "France west" at best, I'm asking reasonable questions, although people will say that they're hateful questions. I'm going to ask them and ask as many as possible, because nothing seems to make sense.
Quite frankly, we may end up with more questions than answers this week, but until we have clear answers on why massive bills are being shoved down the throats of American people without even being read, America, do not allow these people to move any piece of legislation.
I don't believe in coincidence. When I see huge bill after huge bill after huge bill — all hurried and given the same "emergency, must pass now" label, my reaction is — whoa, whoa, whoa, slow down. Why the rush?
Clearly, this is a strategy and it is working. It is overwhelming the system. It is overwhelming Washington, it is overwhelming the media, and it's overwhelming you. It's an idea from the 1960s. There were radicals called Cloward and Piven.
Here it is in a nutshell:
BECK (voice-over): The Cloward-Piven strategy in a nutshell.
Left-wing radicals Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven advance their strategy to end poverty in a May 2, 1966 article in The Nation.
Cloward-Piven starts with the idea that there is a wide gap between the entitlements that poor people are eligible for and the entitlements that they are actually collecting. They say getting everybody on to the welfare rolls will wipe out poverty and the only way to accomplish that is through a massive multi-city education campaign making heavy use of the media.
So, once the poor know that they're eligible and start to sign up, what happens next? In their own words, "a crisis." A crisis that starts in the cities that would rapidly spread to a nationwide level and force the government to move quickly to create a new program for direct income distribution: Marxism.
Wait a minute — community organizations overwhelming the system that would lead to a massive redistribution of wealth? Gee, where have I heard that before?
That's Cloward-Piven strategy in a nutshell.
BECK: I don't know if that's true. I don't know if that's what is happening. But it makes more sense than, oh, yes, we can keep spending more money and not reading the bills.
If you think all of these unread thousand-page bills are just part of a runaway out-of-control government, I don't think it is. It's meant to overwhelm the system. I mean, how can you fight a stimulus package when there is a giant health care bill along side cap-and-trade all going full throttle at you at the same time? What happens when one or all of these massive bills pass?
I showed you the debt clock a minute ago. We can't spend anymore. Even Barack Obama admitted that much, yet here we are with trillion-plus dollar health care bills and more on the table.
Why? Why — given the risk — do you keep pushing?
According to the Cloward and Piven strategy, you do it to collapse the system, and once that system has collapsed, a new one is put in its place. Well, what system could possibly be ready to go? I don't know, but what better time — is there a better time to implement the 1960s radical ideology from scratch than when a president who has clearly said over and over again he's not a Marxist, couples himself with far left-leaning Congress and advisers who are self-proclaimed Marxists, socialists and communists?
I'm going to introduce you to a few of them here. Don't go anywhere tonight. You stay with me.
Pat Caddell is a former Democratic pollster — Democrat, a Democrat.
PAT CADDELL, FORMER DEMOCRATIC POLLSTER: I'm a liberal Democrat.
BECK: Who has taken a hard look — how are you, Pat?
CADDELL: Good to see you, Glenn.
BECK: Good to see you.
You know what? Pat, I am — I am so heartened to see a man who is a liberal Democrat, been in the party forever, come out and say, OK, wait, wait, wait, this isn't making sense on what they're saying.
Do you believe that it makes sense that they're trying to collapse the system?
CADDELL: No, I don't buy this sort of ideological part, although the conclusion may get there. I think they're flooding the zones, to use a football metaphor, I prefer that. I mean, your viewers probably understand that. Setting out so many things and nobody can cover it all.
And I got to tell you what bothers me, Glenn, which is a question that should be asked. I was with an administration, the president comes in, a new president who had not been experienced in Washington and been pent-up demands, for six months in, we were — people are still trying to find out where bathrooms were.
CADDELL: People — they have a lot of people still unemployed. Where are all these pieces and programs coming in all this kind of detail? Where do you get 1,000 pages or 1,300 pages one after the other.
BECK: One after another.
CADDELL: In such a short amount of time? I mean, I have — those are questions that somebody ought to ask because the dog is not barking here.
BECK: Well, we have asked those questions and I'm going to give you some answers here at the other half of the break, and I think you know what some of those answers are. I asked that question back in February and March. I said, this is too massive, it's too big. And the media is treating these things as if they're just magically appearing, but they're not.
CADDELL: You mean like the deficits that appeared on Friday...
CADDELL: And lo and behold, it was only being $2,000 billion off from what it was.
BECK: Let me may I ask you this question: People think Obama is using the unions, is it possible that it's the other way around? And I don't mean just the unions, I mean these vast organizations, that he is not necessarily the grand architect, that somebody else has sketched this out?
CADDELL: Well, I got to tell you, this question hit me today, and it's off the subject of money. But when the attorney general, Eric Holder, who I have not been publicly fond of since he decided to go in on bag with China, on the treasons and trying to buy our election during the Clinton administration and gave us Marc Rich a pardon — one of the most evil men to ever walk the face of the Earth, and was covering up. And now decides that the Black Panthers can't — you know, who carry guns into precincts should not be prosecuted. But despite the president saying we're going to move on on interrogation policy, announces he's going to have a special prosecutor today and appoints me. And I'm going, wait a minute, who's running the show here?
I mean, you got — for the first time I got to ask myself, is Barack Obama really in control — nether he is disingenuous, which I wish not to believe about the president of the United States, or maybe the question is who's really in control here? And it's time to ask that question.
BECK: What makes you say that — explain what makes you say that again?
CADDELL: He has said, my policy is — look, the attorney general is appointed by him. I mean — and by the way, confirmed by Republicans who stood there and praised him. Let's understand, this thing over here you did...
CADDELL: ...is not one party.
BECK: Oh, I know.
CADDELL: This was everybody who did this.
BECK: Oh, yes.
CADDELL: And they're still doing it.
BECK: You wait until — I think it's on Wednesday we're doing some things on some of the framework that's been put in. It was put in by the — by the Bush administration.
CADDELL: Washington is corrupt. Washington has made itself the enemy of the American people is what's happening. But let me not stray off your point, which is what I said was — the president said we're going to move on. The country said, move on on the interrogation policy.
Eric Holder announces he is going to have a special prosecutor today. He's under pressure from the ACLU, from MoveOn.org, from many of the very, very, most liberal groups in my party, or I consider extreme groups in my party.
BECK: Would you agree with me that there is a new Democratic Party?
CADDELL: There is a — I am of the Democrats of the common man. That's where I come from. This is a different Democratic Party, and hopefully, over this time, we'll have some time to talk about it.
BECK: Would you say it's revolutionary?
CADDELL: No, I would say it will — I would say it's revolutionary as much as it's elitist. It's elitist and it believes that it knows best, and it is so interconnected, and money, it has made it.
CADDELL: And, you know, you've got people like George Soros in the middle of it, and, you know, Rahm Emanuel.
Content and Programming Copyright 2009 FOX News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2009 CQ Transcriptions, LLC, which takes sole responsibility for the accuracy of the transcription. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material except for the user's personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon FOX News Network, LLC'S and CQ Transcriptions, LLC's copyrights or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.