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

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Are the American people 'sick of the games and lies' in politics?

April 23, 2015
Staff

WRITER

The 2016 Presidential election is coming up, and candidates are already making their way across the country schmoozing and persuading citizens that they are the right candidate for this country. Last night on the Glenn Beck Program, Glenn took the opportunity to discuss how American's are "sick of the games and of the lies" within both political parties. Are American's finally done listening to power hungry politicians? See what Glenn had to say about it.

Glenn: I think people on both sides of the aisle, both left and right, are really sick of the games and the lies, and most of people are tuning out. That’s a really bad idea. No, it’s shame on me once, or no, it’s fool me once, and shame on me, right? Fool me twice, and I don’t know how this works, but shame on all of us. We’re fed up, and that’s the point. And we’re tired of being fooled and played for fools.

That brings me to Hillary Clinton. Here she is, the least-relatable human being since perhaps Al Gore, trying to go around the country looking like the average person. Saturday Night Live is having a field day with the blatant contradiction. SNL mocks every candidate, but they are going after Hillary with the same zeal they attacked Sarah Palin with. They’re out for blood.

I think she is going to pay for the sins of Obama, quite honestly. No one is falling for the shtick anymore, and I think they’re saying things that they wanted to say about the Obamas but couldn’t. Clinton has made hundreds of millions of dollars since leaving the White House, and by far are the richest presidents of all time, so them being the champion for the little guy is kind of laughable, and everybody knows that they’re out for power and they’re out for money.

You know, they might be people good people, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, but when you put them in the Scooby Doo van, you know, riding around for a couple of days in the Scooby Doo van and then returning first class on a nice jet, hardly winning anybody over. I don’t know if you’ve seen any of the actual footage of her, you know, on her listening tour. Do you think she’s really listening? Really?

The Washington Free Beacon put together a little clip and counted the “um-hum,” counted them. See if you’re feeling the passion here with the 88 um-hums.

VIDEO

Glenn Right now, she’s thinking, “Oh, dear God, when are these people going to stop talking? How much longer do I have to suffer through this? I can’t stand being around these peasants anymore.” Somebody could have said America’s dependence on fluffernutter must stop— um-hum. She wasn’t listening to them at all, not at all.

The Clintons will be making the rounds looking to cash in on every political past favor, but it looks like some may not be all that ready for Hillary after all. The Miami Herald reported today that the former mayor of Miami, Manny Diaz, is hosting an event for Gov. Martin O’Malley. I don’t know about you, but I think people are beating down the doors to get O’Malley to run. That’s one everybody’s been clamoring for. Where is Officer O’Malley?

Who is this guy? I mean, that’s how weak their bench is. There’s nobody lined up to be up next for this one. We’ve got Hillary Clinton, who we all know and deeply love or some guy named O’Malley. Are we witnessing a pivot point in America? Um-hum, um-hum, um-hum. I think we are. Um-hum, um-hum. Is it finally the time that we reject the political family empires in America—you know, the Kennedys and the Bushes and the Clintons? Um-hum, um-hum, um-hum.

It appears the backlash against Hillary is very real and very, very palpable, and I believe the same will hold true when Jeb Bush enters the race. Um-hum, um-hum, I think it will. The entire reason Jeb is waiting so long to run, I think, is because as long as he’s not a declared candidate, he can raise unlimited amounts of funds, so that’s what he’s doing, going around and oil my arms, oil my wallet. Oh, yes. That’s what’s happening. He’s greasing all of the establishment wheels to fill the coffers and then let the machine churn out yet another Dynasty candidate.

Eventually Dynasty was canceled. The Karl Roves of the world say that’s the only way to win. That’s nuts. I think that’s an outright lie and the type of thinking that has done more damage to the Constitution, to the republic, and to the political parties in the past 25 years than in the entire previous 200 years. The truth is if somebody has something legitimate to say and they are authentic, it will connect with the American people, and they will win.

You don’t even have to be authentic. Everybody talks about the brilliance of the Obama campaign. It really wasn’t that smart really. They definitely had a machine of their own, but the real reason he won is because he tapped into something, an idea. He got people to come out to the polls in droves. It wasn’t just money; it was a movement. It was a couple things: One, people on both sides of the aisle really were excited to hey, let’s break a barrier here, let’s have a black guy be president. For as shallow as that seems, it was kind of a cool thing. Okay, I wish there was more than just the color of his skin, but that was a big deal for people on both sides of the aisle.

That was a movement, but people also thought that he would be a uniter who would heal the divisions, stop the nonsense in Washington. They thought he would be transparent; he would end the wars. It was an idea, and here’s the idea, we can be better than we are. As it turns out, he didn’t buy any of that. Um-hum, um-hum, um-hum, none of it.

People are looking for it again, and that’s why people like Ted Cruz, like Rand Paul, because they’re saying something different, and we’re actually looking for somebody to actually say what they believe. I contend we don’t even have to like more than 50% or 60%. I think if you like somebody 50% of what they say, 60% you agree with, you overlook the other 40% because you’re just like they really believe that. If they’re authentic and they believe it, I’m willing to go with that because I’m tired of the um-hum, um-hum. You’re such a peasant. We’re done.

Clinton and Bush represent everything that is wrong with Washington. A new book details how Bill Clinton has raked in over $100 million in speaking fees and appearances. I mean, how many ribbons do you have to cut at the opening of Walmarts to get that kind of money? That’s since he left office, and most of that money—total coincidence—came while Hillary was Secretary of State.

Between 2001 and 2013, the president earned $105 million. Now, during Hillary’s four-year stint as Secretary of State, four years, the ex-president earned $48 million of the $105. Wait a minute, he earned $105 between 2001 and 2013, but for four years he earned $48, and it took double the amount of time to earn the remaining $57 million. So, she has power, and he gets huge speaking fees. She doesn’t have power, and it takes twice the amount of time.

I’m sure nothing nefarious is going on there. And I’m not a monitoring laundering expert or anything like that, but I am a thinker, and it sure seems possible that something kind of nefarious might be going on. Um-hum, um-hum, um-hum. Hillary only deletes her emails about yoga classes. I know, I know. She’s totally on the up and up about everything else.

Here’s the thing, I think America is finally ready to move past the American Dynasty, maybe. It has been boiling beneath the surface for a while. The Tea Party was the first to tap into it, but the other side also had, what was it, the people who were peeing their pants in the park? Operation wall—whatever that was. That was beautiful. There were some real authentic people there too that were sick of this.

The election of Barack Obama was largely based on the belief that he would help reduce or end the partisan bickering, be transparent, clean it up. Real, actual, nonestablishment candidates are now rising to the top, but will they be able to break through that glass ceiling? Will they be able to do that?

The double standard behind the White House outrage

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Presidents have altered the White House for decades, yet only Donald Trump is treated as a vandal for privately funding the East Wing’s restoration.

Every time a president so much as changes the color of the White House drapes, the press clutches its pearls. Unless the name on the stationery is Barack Obama’s, even routine restoration becomes a national outrage.

President Donald Trump’s decision to privately fund upgrades to the White House — including a new state ballroom — has been met with the usual chorus of gasps and sneers. You’d think he bulldozed Monticello.

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s ‘visionary.’

The irony is that presidents have altered and expanded the White House for more than a century. President Franklin D. Roosevelt added the East and West Wings in the middle of the Great Depression. Newspapers accused him of building a palace while Americans stood in breadlines. History now calls it “vision.”

First lady Nancy Reagan faced the same hysteria. Headlines accused her of spending taxpayer money on new china “while Americans starved.” In truth, she raised private funds after learning that the White House didn’t have enough matching plates for state dinners. She took the ridicule and refused to pass blame.

“I’m a big girl,” she told her staff. “This comes with the job.” That was dignity — something the press no longer recognizes.

A restoration, not a renovation

Trump’s project is different in every way that should matter. It costs taxpayers nothing. Not a cent. The president and a few friends privately fund the work. There’s no private pool or tennis court, no personal perks. The additions won’t even be completed until after he leaves office.

What’s being built is not indulgence — it’s stewardship. A restoration of aging rooms, worn fixtures, and century-old bathrooms that no longer function properly in the people’s house. Trump has paid for cast brass doorknobs engraved with the presidential seal, restored the carpets and moldings, and ensured that the architecture remains faithful to history.

The media’s response was mockery and accusations of vanity. They call it “grotesque excess,” while celebrating billion-dollar “climate art” projects and funneling hundreds of millions into activist causes like the No Kings movement. They lecture America on restraint while living off the largesse of billionaires.

The selective guardians of history

Where was this sudden reverence for history when rioters torched St. John’s Church — the same church where every president since James Madison has worshipped? The press called it an “expression of grief.”

Where was that reverence when mobs toppled statues of Washington, Jefferson, and Grant? Or when first lady Melania Trump replaced the Rose Garden’s lawn with a patio but otherwise followed Jackie Kennedy’s original 1962 plans in the garden’s restoration? They called that “desecration.”

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s “visionary.”

The real desecration

The people shrieking about “historic preservation” care nothing for history. They hate the idea that something lasting and beautiful might be built by hands they despise. They mock craftsmanship because it exposes their own cultural decay.

The White House ballroom is not a scandal — it’s a mirror. And what it reflects is the media’s own pettiness. The ruling class that ridicules restoration is the same class that cheered as America’s monuments fell. Its members sneer at permanence because permanence condemns them.

Julia Beverly / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s improvements are an act of faith — in the nation’s symbols, its endurance, and its worth. The outrage over a privately funded renovation says less about him than it does about the journalists who mistake destruction for progress.

The real desecration isn’t happening in the East Wing. It’s happening in the newsrooms that long ago tore up their own foundation — truth — and never bothered to rebuild it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

A new Monroe Doctrine? Trump quietly redraws the Western map

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The president’s moves in Venezuela, Guyana, and Colombia aren’t about drugs. They’re about re-establishing America’s sovereignty across the Western Hemisphere.

For decades, we’ve been told America’s wars are about drugs, democracy, or “defending freedom.” But look closer at what’s unfolding off the coast of Venezuela, and you’ll see something far more strategic taking shape. Donald Trump’s so-called drug war isn’t about fentanyl or cocaine. It’s about control — and a rebirth of American sovereignty.

The aim of Trump’s ‘drug war’ is to keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

The president understands something the foreign policy class forgot long ago: The world doesn’t respect apologies. It respects strength.

While the global elites in Davos tout the Great Reset, Trump is building something entirely different — a new architecture of power based on regional independence, not global dependence. His quiet campaign in the Western Hemisphere may one day be remembered as the second Monroe Doctrine.

Venezuela sits at the center of it all. It holds the world’s largest crude oil reserves — oil perfectly suited for America’s Gulf refineries. For years, China and Russia have treated Venezuela like a pawn on their chessboard, offering predatory loans in exchange for control of those resources. The result has been a corrupt, communist state sitting in our own back yard. For too long, Washington shrugged. Not any more.The naval exercises in the Caribbean, the sanctions, the patrols — they’re not about drug smugglers. They’re about evicting China from our hemisphere.

Trump is using the old “drug war” playbook to wage a new kind of war — an economic and strategic one — without firing a shot at our actual enemies. The goal is simple: Keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

Beyond Venezuela

Just east of Venezuela lies Guyana, a country most Americans couldn’t find on a map a year ago. Then ExxonMobil struck oil, and suddenly Guyana became the newest front in a quiet geopolitical contest. Washington is helping defend those offshore platforms, build radar systems, and secure undersea cables — not for charity, but for strategy. Control energy, data, and shipping lanes, and you control the future.

Moreover, Colombia — a country once defined by cartels — is now positioned as the hinge between two oceans and two continents. It guards the Panama Canal and sits atop rare-earth minerals every modern economy needs. Decades of American presence there weren’t just about cocaine interdiction; they were about maintaining leverage over the arteries of global trade. Trump sees that clearly.

PEDRO MATTEY / Contributor | Getty Images

All of these recent news items — from the military drills in the Caribbean to the trade negotiations — reflect a new vision of American power. Not global policing. Not endless nation-building. It’s about strategic sovereignty.

It’s the same philosophy driving Trump’s approach to NATO, the Middle East, and Asia. We’ll stand with you — but you’ll stand on your own two feet. The days of American taxpayers funding global security while our own borders collapse are over.

Trump’s Monroe Doctrine

Critics will call it “isolationism.” It isn’t. It’s realism. It’s recognizing that America’s strength comes not from fighting other people’s wars but from securing our own energy, our own supply lines, our own hemisphere. The first Monroe Doctrine warned foreign powers to stay out of the Americas. The second one — Trump’s — says we’ll defend them, but we’ll no longer be their bank or their babysitter.

Historians may one day mark this moment as the start of a new era — when America stopped apologizing for its own interests and started rebuilding its sovereignty, one barrel, one chip, and one border at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Antifa isn’t “leaderless” — It’s an organized machine of violence

Jeff J Mitchell / Staff | Getty Images

The mob rises where men of courage fall silent. The lesson from Portland, Chicago, and other blue cities is simple: Appeasing radicals doesn’t buy peace — it only rents humiliation.

Parts of America, like Portland and Chicago, now resemble occupied territory. Progressive city governments have surrendered control to street militias, leaving citizens, journalists, and even federal officers to face violent anarchists without protection.

Take Portland, where Antifa has terrorized the city for more than 100 consecutive nights. Federal officers trying to keep order face nightly assaults while local officials do nothing. Independent journalists, such as Nick Sortor, have even been arrested for documenting the chaos. Sortor and Blaze News reporter Julio Rosas later testified at the White House about Antifa’s violence — testimony that corporate media outlets buried.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened.

Chicago offers the same grim picture. Federal agents have been stalked, ambushed, and denied backup from local police while under siege from mobs. Calls for help went unanswered, putting lives in danger. This is more than disorder; it is open defiance of federal authority and a violation of the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.

A history of violence

For years, the legacy media and left-wing think tanks have portrayed Antifa as “decentralized” and “leaderless.” The opposite is true. Antifa is organized, disciplined, and well-funded. Groups like Rose City Antifa in Oregon, the Elm Fork John Brown Gun Club in Texas, and Jane’s Revenge operate as coordinated street militias. Legal fronts such as the National Lawyers Guild provide protection, while crowdfunding networks and international supporters funnel money directly to the movement.

The claim that Antifa lacks structure is a convenient myth — one that’s cost Americans dearly.

History reminds us what happens when mobs go unchecked. The French Revolution, Weimar Germany, Mao’s Red Guards — every one began with chaos on the streets. But it wasn’t random. Today’s radicals follow the same playbook: Exploit disorder, intimidate opponents, and seize moral power while the state looks away.

Dismember the dragon

The Trump administration’s decision to designate Antifa a domestic terrorist organization was long overdue. The label finally acknowledged what citizens already knew: Antifa functions as a militant enterprise, recruiting and radicalizing youth for coordinated violence nationwide.

But naming the threat isn’t enough. The movement’s financiers, organizers, and enablers must also face justice. Every dollar that funds Antifa’s destruction should be traced, seized, and exposed.

AFP Contributor / Contributor | Getty Images

This fight transcends party lines. It’s not about left versus right; it’s about civilization versus anarchy. When politicians and judges excuse or ignore mob violence, they imperil the republic itself. Americans must reject silence and cowardice while street militias operate with impunity.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened. The violence in Portland and Chicago is deliberate, not spontaneous. If America fails to confront it decisively, the price won’t just be broken cities — it will be the erosion of the republic itself.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

URGENT: Supreme Court case could redefine religious liberty

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

The state is effectively silencing professionals who dare speak truths about gender and sexuality, redefining faith-guided speech as illegal.

This week, free speech is once again on the line before the U.S. Supreme Court. At stake is whether Americans still have the right to talk about faith, morality, and truth in their private practice without the government’s permission.

The case comes out of Colorado, where lawmakers in 2019 passed a ban on what they call “conversion therapy.” The law prohibits licensed counselors from trying to change a minor’s gender identity or sexual orientation, including their behaviors or gender expression. The law specifically targets Christian counselors who serve clients attempting to overcome gender dysphoria and not fall prey to the transgender ideology.

The root of this case isn’t about therapy. It’s about erasing a worldview.

The law does include one convenient exception. Counselors are free to “assist” a person who wants to transition genders but not someone who wants to affirm their biological sex. In other words, you can help a child move in one direction — one that is in line with the state’s progressive ideology — but not the other.

Think about that for a moment. The state is saying that a counselor can’t even discuss changing behavior with a client. Isn’t that the whole point of counseling?

One‑sided freedom

Kaley Chiles, a licensed professional counselor in Colorado Springs, has been one of the victims of this blatant attack on the First Amendment. Chiles has dedicated her practice to helping clients dealing with addiction, trauma, sexuality struggles, and gender dysphoria. She’s also a Christian who serves patients seeking guidance rooted in biblical teaching.

Before 2019, she could counsel minors according to her faith. She could talk about biblical morality, identity, and the path to wholeness. When the state outlawed that speech, she stopped. She followed the law — and then she sued.

Her case, Chiles v. Salazar, is now before the Supreme Court. Justices heard oral arguments on Tuesday. The question: Is counseling a form of speech or merely a government‑regulated service?

If the court rules the wrong way, it won’t just silence therapists. It could muzzle pastors, teachers, parents — anyone who believes in truth grounded in something higher than the state.

Censored belief

I believe marriage between a man and a woman is ordained by God. I believe that family — mother, father, child — is central to His design for humanity.

I believe that men and women are created in God’s image, with divine purpose and eternal worth. Gender isn’t an accessory; it’s part of who we are.

I believe the command to “be fruitful and multiply” still stands, that the power to create life is sacred, and that it belongs within marriage between a man and a woman.

And I believe that when we abandon these principles — when we treat sex as recreation, when we dissolve families, when we forget our vows — society fractures.

Are those statements controversial now? Maybe. But if this case goes against Chiles, those statements and others could soon be illegal to say aloud in public.

Faith on trial

In Colorado today, a counselor cannot sit down with a 15‑year‑old who’s struggling with gender identity and say, “You were made in God’s image, and He does not make mistakes.” That is now considered hate speech.

That’s the “freedom” the modern left is offering — freedom to affirm, but never to question. Freedom to comply, but never to dissent. The same movement that claims to champion tolerance now demands silence from anyone who disagrees. The root of this case isn’t about therapy. It’s about erasing a worldview.

The real test

No matter what happens at the Supreme Court, we cannot stop speaking the truth. These beliefs aren’t political slogans. For me, they are the product of years of wrestling, searching, and learning through pain and grace what actually leads to peace. For us, they are the fundamental principles that lead to a flourishing life. We cannot balk at standing for truth.

Maybe that’s why God allows these moments — moments when believers are pushed to the wall. They force us to ask hard questions: What is true? What is worth standing for? What is worth dying for — and living for?

If we answer those questions honestly, we’ll find not just truth, but freedom.

The state doesn’t grant real freedom — and it certainly isn’t defined by Colorado legislators. Real freedom comes from God. And the day we forget that, the First Amendment will mean nothing at all.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.