Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Enough is enough: Bring them home, period.

June 17, 2014
Radio Clips

The Glenn Beck Program

On radio this morning, Glenn looked at the troubling news of the day in a slightly different light. Glenn remains steadfast in his belief that the United States government must bring our servicemen and women home and not put troops on the ground in Iraq. This morning, he went so far as to “lead with his mistakes” and admit that liberals had the right idea back in the early 2000s when they opposed intervention in the Middle East. And yet despite all the forces at play that are trying to tear us apart, Glenn remained surprisingly optimistic about America’s future.

Below is an edited transcript of the monologue:

I want to the start in a different place. The media keeps saying we are a nation that is being torn apart at the seams. In some ways, I agree with them, only because we are not looking for the things that bring us together. The left and right, we can't agree on anything, right? The only place we can find common ground is in the hatred of one another. That's the narrative that everybody is giving you. Unfortunately, there is some truth to that, unless we decide to look for more.

We have been greatly divided. When the President burst out on the scene, he talked about how George Bush tore us apart with two wars and we had an economic disaster. A lot of people said, ‘He's right. We were a mess.’ We really, truly were a mess in 2008.

I don't think it's gotten any better for the last five years. We have done nothing but watch our country and our families, our friends be ripped apart. We are deeper in debt. We are immersed in foreign wars. Our economy is much more fragile than it was in 2008. Racial tensions are higher than I have ever seen them. I'm 50 years old. I don't remember an America that felt like this race-wise. We are far from reaching across the aisle. I shouldn't say that. The Republicans and Democrats are perfectly fine reaching across the aisle. They are not only reaching across the aisle, they are reaching across the aisle and fondling each other. It's just they are on the same exact page, and they will demonize. The Republicans are doing it, and the Democrats will do it. They will demonize anyone that steps out of line with the parties.

As bad as it has been, amazingly enough, lately, we seem to be finding areas where we all agree. There are things that are happening in America. For instance, the VA scandal. The VA scandal, Americans agree, is horrific. We need to plant our flag in some places where we know we are on the right side. Let's start planting our flags where we can have some victory. That's one of them: The VA scandal. Let's start reaching across to people in our neighborhood, our friends who vote differently than us, on things like the VA scandal. There's tons of blame. The President campaigned in 2008 on the VA saying that it was completely out of control. Now it's much worse now, but that's the place we could start. George Bush screwed it up. I know. It was horrible. Good. Your guy didn't do anything, so let's fix it now.

We will be coming together to stop Common Core. I can't tell you how remarkable this Common Core thing is. When Bill Gates comes up and gives a speech: ‘How about we call it a two-year hiatus? Just give it two years, see if it works. If it doesn't, we'll just give up. Let's do that.’ Really? They're letting Justina [Pelletier] go probably in the next couple of weeks too. We're on to you, Bill.

Here's the great thing: No matter how much money you are spending to sell us this load of bull crap, Americans aren't buying it. It is not just the right. It's the left too. It's the teachers. It's the Chicago teachers union. Could we get any more left than that? The Tea Party standing side-by-side with the Chicago teachers unions? That's fantastic.

America is healing herself. I really want to talk to you about this compass I have been working on. I have said for a while that there's going to come a time when everything you know is upside down, when what you thought was solid would be liquid and liquid will be solid. Up is down, down is up. What was right will be wrong. Good will become evil. And there will be nothing that you recognize or can count on. I have said that for probably eight years. The time is here.

We are headed in exactly the wrong direction. We are at the polar opposite now of where we should be going. That's not a conservative saying that. I believe that's anyone with any common sense. ‘We should be doing more testing on our kids?’ Come on. You know that's not right. ‘We should have more Islamic oversight in our Department of Homeland Security.’ You know that's not right. ‘We should spend more money to get out of debt.’ You know that's not right. ‘We should rush doctors and nurses and build emergency centers for the people who are coming across our borders, and they are coming here illegally and we are putting them on military bases.’ Meanwhile, we can't get the military to be able to get in to see a doctor for things like cancer. You know that's not right.

Maybe we could come together now on this nightmare in Iraq. From the beginning, most people on the left were against going into Iraq. I wasn't. At the time I believed that the United States was under threat from Saddam Hussein. I really truly believed that Saddam Hussein was funding terrorists. We knew that. He was funding the terrorists in Hamas. We knew that he was giving money. We could track that. We knew he hated us. We knew that without a shadow of a doubt. It wasn't much or a stretch to believe that he would fund a terror strike against us, especially since he would say that. So I took him at his word.

There were also atrocities that were happening in Iraq torture chambers, mass graves. At the time, the unanimous belief – even with Hillary Clinton and everybody else – was that he had weapon of mass destruction. There was also the element – and this is really what spoke to me – of bringing freedom to the people of Iraq for the first time in their long history. I don't want to control Iraq, but I have a soft spot for people who are being tortured and just want freedom because I really, truly believe Democrats and Republicans are the same. Israelis and Palestinians are the same. Once you get the politicians to leave the room, once you can deprogram people from what the politicians and leaders have said, everyone is pretty much the same. It's like, ‘I just want to be left alone.’ ‘I just want to raise my family, have fun.’ ‘I want a decent life.’ Then politicians get involved and program us to hate each other. You have to be carefully taught who to hate.

Now, in spite of the things I felt at the time when we went into war, liberals said: We shouldn't get involved. We shouldn't nation-build. And there was no indication the people of Iraq had the will to be free. I thought that was insulting at the time. Everybody wants to be free. They said we couldn't force freedom on people. Let me lead with my mistakes. You are right. Liberals, you were right. We shouldn't have.

Now, if you believed those things, let me say: You were right. If you were just using it for political purposes, well, we don't have anything in common, But if you really believe those things, I would like to have a conversation with you now to find out exactly how you came to terms with that – especially being a progressive. If you know the history of the progressive movement, it was Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson that started imposing democracy in South America. The reason why South America is just loaded with communists is because we put a lot of them in. That's the progressive ideal.

But I agree with you: You cannot force democracy on the Iraqis or anybody else. It doesn't work. They don't understand it or even really want it. They may be too immersed in their own belief of Sharia Law to embrace liberty or at least at this time. If people vote for Sharia Law, they vote for Sharia Law. We tried. What can we do? We have lost thousands of American lives. We have lost thousands of lives on the Iraqi side and tens of thousands have been wounded. We have spent $2 trillion – say that again – $2 trillion, and upwards of 200,000 Iraqi citizens, aid workers, insurgents have been killed. That's the conservative number. Liberals will tell you it's almost 1 million people. I don't know what the number is, but after all of that, hundreds of thousands of lives, $2 trillion, the best minds in the world trying to do it, it's about to fall apart.

Terrorists of the most radical kind – maybe the most radical we have witnessed since Nazis – are now poised to overrun the capitol city. All of our effort, all our sacrifices, all of it is gone. $1 billion embassy, which I contend, I have nothing to back it up except my gut, that's not an embassy. It is a listening station. There's something wrong with that embassy. You don't build something that big in Baghdad. How many of us are going, ‘I'm going to vacation in Baghdad. Hope they have a nice embassy’? What do we have it there for? Why is it that big? Something is wrong with that.

But, anyway, all of that is gone. And yet, this is something I think that we can come together with, on the right and the left. And it's this – I have more of a chance of hacking off my loyal listeners and audience by saying this, but so be it: Not one more life. Not one more life. Not one more dollar, not one more airplane, not one more bullet, not one more Marine, not one more arm or leg or eye. Not one more.

The people of Iraq have got to work this out themselves. Our days of being the world's policemen, our days of interventionists is over. If we are directly attacked, so be it. But this must end now.

Can't we come together on that? Are we not all a people that can come together on that? Wedon't want our sacrifice to be a waste. Let me ask you this question: What good will one more life do? To waste one more life, what good will it do, to waste another dollar, let alone another trillion? And conservatives, is there one that believes this President will prosecute a new war in Iraq properly? When the biggest hawk of them all, the Darth Vader of the entire galactic empire, Dick Cheney and George Bush didn't prosecute it right? No. In the end, the result will be the same. Another group of radicals will pop up again. It is like a never-ending game of whack amole over there. The only way to prevent Baghdad from being overrun eventually is stay there and continue to fight this militarily in perpetuity. Are you willing to do that?

Don't even start with me on your oil an gas. Guess we should have thought about that earlier. Maybe if we use our own oil and gas, we wouldn't have to worry about this. Liberals, you were against it in the first place. How could you be in favor of more intervention now? How could you possibly be for that after everything you have said about how it's going to fall apart in the end was right? Everything I said that we could hold it together was wrong.

We need to pull out and end the long nightmarish involvement in this mess. We need to do the same in Afghanistan, once and for all. I remember back in the 1970s, we were going to the moon and liberals at that time would say, ‘We have bigger problems here on earth that need to be taken care of.’ How much more is that argument correctly applied to today's situation?

Finally, there are some things we can agree on. Finally, there are some things we can come together on and clean up our own house. But if we do to the liberals what they did to us and George W. Bush and make it just about politics, we will be divided more. This cannot become about the President. It cannot become act the Democrats. This has to become about the principles because in the principles we all agree. Enough is enough. Bring them home, period.

Top THREE reasons the U.S. NEEDS Greenland

EMIL STACH / Contributor | Getty Images

Are Trump's repeated promises to claim Greenland for the U.S. just belligerent imperialism or a deft move to secure the future of America?

During his patriotic inaugural address, President Trump reiterated his campaign promise to expand American territories, including securing U.S. control over Greenland. This is not a new idea despite what the mainstream media may claim.

The idea of buying Greenland was originally introduced by progressive hero Woodrow Wilson in 1917 as an attempt to secure the homeland as America was gearing up to enter the First World War. The second attempt came after World War II when President Truman tried to buy the island from Denmark in another attempt to shore up national security, this time against the Soviets. Since then, Trump floated the idea in 2019, which was met with much the same ridicule as now.

The truth is that the acquisition of Greenland represents far more than just an outlet for repressed imperialist desires. It would be one of America's best investments in a long time, which is why we've been eyeballing it for so long. Here are three reasons the U.S. needs Greenland:

Strategic Military Position

THOMAS TRAASDAHL / Contributor | Getty Images

For the majority of the 20th century, Europe was the region from which a foreign attack on American soil could be launched: the Germans for the first half of the century, and the Russians for the second half. On both occasions, Greenland stood between our foreign enemies and the United States.

After the World War II, America was the official military defender of Greenland, per an agreement with Denmark. Under this agreement, the U.S. built Pituffik Air Force Base, a remote base 750 miles north of the Arctic Circle. Due to its location, approximately halfway between D.C. and Moscow, the Pentagon still views Pituffik as a vital component of America's nuclear defense.

The U.S. also built a secret base within the ice cap known as Camp Century. Camp Century was part scientific outpost, part nuclear-tipped ballistic missile silo built in the ice to withstand a direct atomic strike. The nearly two miles of icy tunnels were powered by a nuclear reactor and were designed to survive a nuclear first strike, and return fire. Although abandoned in 1967, Camp Century still symbolizes the strategic importance of Greenland for U.S. security.

Untapped Resources

OLIVIER MORIN / Contributor | Getty Images

While Greenland's population is a mere 56,000, the island has a total landmass nearly three times the size of Texas. According to a 2009 geological assessment, a whopping 30 percent of the Earth's undiscovered natural gas, and 13 percent of its undiscovered oil is locked away beneath Greenland's icy ground. There are also untapped deposits of valuable rare earth metals including copper, graphite, and lithium.

Neither Greenland nor Denmark have any real plans to tap into this immense wealth trapped beneath the ice, but it could prove crucial for ending the West's dependency on China. China has the global market cornered on rare earth minerals- including America. We acquire 72 percent of our rare earth mineral imports from China, making us entirely dependent on them for the manufacturing of many essential goods. Tapping Greenland's natural resources would help free America, and the West, from China's yolk.

Polar Silk Road

mark peterson / Contributor | Getty Images

In 2018 China launched an ambitious project that aimed to cut the travel time of cargo vessels between its ports and European markets in half. China, in collaboration with Russia, plans on developing new shipping routes through the Arctic Ocean. This bold new strategy, dubbed the "Polar Silk Road," has been made possible thanks to new tech, including a fleet of Russian, nuclear-powered icebreakers, the latest of which is capable of breaking through nearly 10 feet of ice.

With clear waterways from eastern China and Northern Europe, it won't be long before the first cargo ships brave the frigid sea and China looks to the next leg of the journey: the Northwest Passage. The Northwest Passage is the area of sea between Canada and the North Pole that would be an optimal shipping route between America's East Coast and Asia if it wasn't frozen over most of the year. But with new technology, we may be able to overcome the challenges of the ice and open the passage to commercial traffic, and Greenland is positioned directly on the passage's easternmost mouth.

Greenland would quickly become a key location along the Northwestern Passage, acting as a sentinel of the east, with the ability to control traffic through the trade route. If China or Russia were to take control of Greenland, they would dominate the Northwestern Passage, along with the rest of the new northern trade routes.

Is Romania squashing its own 'Trump' candidate?

DANIEL MIHAILESCU / Contributor | Getty Images

This week the streets of Bucharest, the capital of Romania, erupted in protest after the Constitutional Courts annulled the recent first round of the presidential election after the "far-right" candidate won.

The government is lying to you. If you have been listening to Glenn for a long time you already know that, and you also know that if you try to call attention to the lies you get labeled a conspiracy theorist or "far-right." This is not only true in America but across the world. Politicians cheat, steal, and grab power, then lie about all of it. This is the root of countless issues across every government on the planet, and recently Romania has become the latest example of this unfortunate phenomenon.

But what is really happening in Romania? Was this an actual attempt to stamp out someone who would shed light on lies and corruption? Or did the Romanian government put a stop to a genuine bad actor?

The Election

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

On December 6th, 2024, the Romanian Constitutional Court canceled the second round of the presidential election amid claims of Russian interference. The second round of the election would have seen right-wing candidate, Calin Georgescu face off against pro-European centrist Elena Lasconi.

The trouble surrounds Georgescu, who stands accused of using Russian aid to run an unprecedented social media campaign that helped him win an election pollsters claimed he stood no chance of winning. Georgescu's rapid rise in popularity on social media does raise some eyebrows, and to add to the suspicion he declared he had zero campaign spending. On the other hand, Georgescu's supporters claim that his quick rise to stardom and underdog victory is due to the growing resentment for the ever-out-of-touch political elite.

Georgescu's Platform

Andrei Pungovschi / Stringer | Getty Images

Georgescu rose to prominence on a platform many of his detractors have labeled "far-right," "pro-Russian," and "populist" (sound familiar?). His positions include supporting Romanian farmers, increasing Romanian self-reliance, and increasing local energy production. Georgescu has been lauded for his message of hope and vision for the future and his dedication to truth, freedom, and sovereignty.

Georgescu is also a vocal Christian and a supporter of the Romanian Orthodox Church. He has questioned the climate change and COVID-19 narrative as well as NATO and the war in Ukraine, which is how he earned his "Pro-Russian" monicker. Georgescu promised to respect and honor its obligations to the EU and NATO, but only to the extent that they respect Romania and its interests.

What Happens Next?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

After Georgescu's unexpected victory, the Romanian Constitutional Courts annulled the election's first round and scheduled it to restart on May 4th. As of now, it is unclear whether Georgescu will be allowed to participate in the new election. This act by the Constitutional Courts triggered mass protests in the capital, Bucharest, and has caused many Romainians to question the state of democracy within their country.

Many of the protesters are calling what happened a coup and are demanding the election be allowed to continue to the second round. They are also calling for the resignation of current President Klaus Iohannis, who has maintained power thanks to the incomplete elections. Georgescu has officially challenged the court's decision and even made a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights, but it is unclear if his appeal will make any difference.

Glenn: Texas judge deals a crushing blow to ESG agenda

The tides have turned — and now the very same banks that were pushing heavy-handed environmental, social, governance rules are running away from them.

In a significant victory, a federal judge in Texas has ruled that employers and asset managers cannot use environmental, social, and governance factors in employee retirement accounts. If this ruling holds up — which is likely, given the conservative composition of the appellate court — it will dramatically shift the balance of power between corporations and their employees.

This decision represents one of the most substantial blows to the ESG agenda to date. Companies that have been steering employees into ESG-focused investments, which prioritize progressive values over financial returns, now face legal repercussions. Continuing such practices would directly violate federal law. The ruling forces companies to re-evaluate their commitment to ESG initiatives, and many may withdraw from these funds before the case even reaches the appellate court.

Watching these corporations squirm as they try to backtrack and avoid legal repercussions is ever so satisfying.

The impact of this ruling could very well be the beginning of the end for the ESG movement as it’s been pushed by elites.

In even better news, BlackRock, a major player in the ESG movement, has officially left the United Nations’ International Association of Asset Managers. This is a direct rebuke of the global push for ESG initiatives and a major sign that the tide is turning. In contrast to the Glasgow Net Zero Conference in which the Global Financial Alliance for Net Zero — an organization championed by global elites — was pushing for ESG to be a central focus, BlackRock’s departure from the group signals that even those who were at the forefront of this movement are starting to distance themselves.

But it doesn't stop there. Every major U.S. bank has now announced that they too are leaving the U.N.’s Association of Net Zero ESG Bankers, another key part of the Glasgow Financial Alliance. For years, we’ve been warning that ESG in banking was one of the primary ways elites like Biden, the Davos crowd, and others were planning to reset the world’s economy.

The tides have turned — and now those very same banks are running away from ESG, a powerful signal of things to come. They know they’re on the losing side, and they’re scared that a new administration will come down hard on them for their involvement in these globalist initiatives.

In another win, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau unveiled a shocking new rule that, if it survives, would prohibit many financial institutions from de-banking customers based on their political or religious views, or even certain types of speech. While the rule is not as comprehensive as we need it to be, it’s a step in the right direction — and it includes concerns raised by our allies about the dangers of ESG. The Trump administration has promised to come down even harder on the banks with tougher rules, and this is a very good start.

Watching these corporations squirm as they try to backtrack and avoid legal repercussions is ever so satisfying. Some are running for cover while others are desperately trying to ingratiate themselves with the powers that be. It’s clear that the backbone of these companies is made of rubber, not steel. They don’t really believe in the ESG values they preach — they’re just playing the game to get in bed with the political elites.

Now that Trump is back in town, these corporations are showing their true colors. They never cared about their customers or the values they forced upon them. It was always about the power they could acquire through catering to those in power at the time.

No company should be afraid of the president of the United States. But they’re not afraid of Donald Trump. They’re afraid of the return of the rule of law. They know that fascistic public-private partnerships between the government and corporations are on the way out. That’s a victory for freedom and a victory for the American people.

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Inside President Trump's EXCLUSIVE inauguration balls

Joe Raedle / Staff | Getty Images

Inauguration Monday was a busy day for President Trump, and it didn't stop after his inauguration address either. President Trump partied across D.C. long into the night.

Exclusive balls are a D.C. tradition on inauguration night, hosting many of the nation's most influential people. President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump appeared at three of the most prestigious balls: the Commander-in-Chief Ball, the Liberty Ball, and the Starlight Ball.

These parties had star-studded guest lists that included celebrities, musicians, politicians, and many more. Here is a peek into the exclusive inaugural balls:

Commander-in-Chief Ball

  

The Washington Post / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump's first stop was at the Commander-in-Chief Ball, an event dedicated to the armed forces that defend our nation. The event included a dance where Vice President J.D. Vance and his wife Usha Vance joined the President and First Lady on stage and a performance from the country music band Rascal Flatts and country singer Parker McCollum. President Trump also spoke to U.S. service members stationed in South Korea on a video call and cut a cake shaped like Air Force One with a sword.

Several people of note were in attendance, including Trump's pick for Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, and actor Jon Voight. Musician and avid Trump supporter Kid Rock was also in attendance along with country music star Billy Ray Cyrus.

Liberty Ball

  

The Washington Post / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump's second stop of the night was at the Liberty Ball, an event thrown for all of Trump's loyal supporters. The event had a magnificent lineup of musicians, including country singer Jason Aldean and rapper Nelly. There was even a live performance of Trump's iconic campaign song, "YMCA" by Village People.

Also in attendance were President Trump's daughter, Ivanka Trump, and her husband Jared Kushner, who appeared on stage with her father.

Starlight Ball

  

JIM WATSON / Contributor | Getty Images

Wrapping up his night of celebration, President Trump visited the Starlight Ball, which was full of major donors to his campaign.

Shortly after arriving, the presidential couple and the vice presidential couple shared a dance in front of a mock White House. Later the stage featured singer Gavin DeGraw for a memorable performance. Notably, renowned podcaster and comedian Theo Von was spotted entering the event. Von is known for hosting President Trump on his podcast for an in-depth interview during his campaign, which many credit boosting Trump's popularity with the younger generation.