Unbelievable: Michelle Obama’s Target story has nothing to do with race and she knows it

Yesterday Glenn reacted to Michelle Obama’s story of experiencing racism while shopping at Target. Turns out she’s told the same story before, only it doesn’t seem to have any racism in it at all. See Michelle Obama tell the story to David Letterman in quite a different way. Plus, Glenn gets a call from a woman claiming to be the sister of the person who offended Obama. Is she racist?

Watch the Letterman appearance below:

Below is a transcript of the segment:

GLENN: All right. Michelle Obama. We just played the audio. She was on David Letterman. She spoke about going to Target. She talked about meeting a short woman who was in the detergent aisle, and she said, nobody knew who I was. This woman didn't know who I was, asked if I could help, and get the detergent. She said the short woman then, you know, said, you didn't need to make it look that easy. So she had a good sense of humor. That's what she said on David Letterman about a year ago.

Now in "People" magazine when asked about the kind of racism they have to put up with -- the Obamas, you know, there in the White House. This is what she said. Can you read this, please?

JEFFY: I think people forget that we've lived in the White House for six years. Before that, Barack Obama was a black man that lived on the south side of Chicago who had his share of troubles catching cabs. I tell this story, I mean, even as the first lady, during that wonderfully publicized trip I took to Target, not highly disguised. The only person who came up to me in the store was a woman who asked me to help her take something off a shelf because she didn't see me as the first lady. She saw me as someone who could help her. Those kinds of things happen in life, so it isn't anything new.

STU: Then the next line is Barack talking about race as well.

JEFFY: There is no black male my age who is a professional who hasn't come out of a restaurant waiting for their car and somebody didn't hand them their car keys.

STU: So it's all about race all around. This is -- obviously she's telling this as a racial story.

GLENN: Okay. Now, Donna is on the phone. She's a fan of Pat and Stu. She called the Pat & Stu Show yesterday. And we have her on her words. So we don't have independent verification that her sister was the one that was in the aisle, that asked the first lady, could you help me with that box of detergent.

Donna, welcome to the program.

CALLER: Thank you.

GLENN: Why should we believe you, that this is your sister?

CALLER: Well, you know, just there's no reason, except there's no reason for me to call and tell y'all this except that it happened. And I'll tell you, the funny thing is, my sister didn't even know it was Michelle Obama until she was lying in the bed with her husband watching David Letterman and heard Michelle Obama tell the story. And she looked at her husband and said, that was me.

And he wouldn't believe her, except that Michelle Obama included that detail about, well, you didn't have to make it look so easy. That that's my sister. He knew she would have said that. And he said, oh, my word, it was you.

And that's how she found out that it was Michelle Obama. And then wrote her a little note. Now whether Michelle Obama ever got it, I don't know. She just said, hey, it was me in the store, and I probably didn't even say thank you.

What she didn't tell her, she told us, and we laughed about it. Probably one of the reasons why she didn't recognize her is because she didn't really look up. She was examining the detergent. She said, she reached down -- a real flowery scent, and this was for her son to take off to college. And she kept thinking, I'd really like a different one, but I'd hate to ask this woman to put this back and get another one too.

Michelle Obama told it accurately the first time, but she is twisting it now to make my sister out to be a racist. Now, her name isn't out there. But I just got furious on my sister's behalf. I can -- we have political differences, big time, but my sister is not a racist.

GLENN: Okay. You're a fan of Pat and Stu, so I'm assuming that you're a conservative.

CALLER: Yes. Yes.

GLENN: And your sister -- it's our understanding -- because I believe somebody on the Blaze spoke to your sister yesterday.

STU: I think Keith did.

CALLER: Yeah. I asked for her permission to give her number to y'all. Because I wasn't going to do that without her permission. She had no idea I had called. I thought she would be furious with me.

GLENN: Well, it's our impression that she was not. That she's actually very upset that she's being painted as a racist as well.

CALLER: Yeah, she's not happy about it because she knows how it happened, and Michelle Obama knows too because she wouldn't have told the story like she did on David Letterman, very close to the real event. Now time has passed and it's a great story for her to, you know, make it into a race thing, which it is not.

And I just called to set the record straight because that infuriated me. I'm all about great race relations. I want to talk about it. I want to -- if I can help in any way, I want to help. But this is not helping. There's real racism out there that we could talk about. This is not real racism at all. Race didn't even come into play.

GLENN: Your sister voted for Obama twice?

CALLER: Oh, yes. Oh, yes. They are huge Obama fans. Which, you know, and I'm the one -- my brother-in-law works -- I won't say. The banter around the water cooler at that station was, hey, when that story broke, wasn't this your wife? And they were jabbing with him about it. Can you imagine if his wife came on Glenn Beck? He'd never hear the end of it.

GLENN: Here's the interesting thing, that station knows exactly what the story is.

CALLER: Oh, yeah. They won't play it though.

GLENN: But that is fascinating. That they have first-hand knowledge of who this person is, how it came down --

CALLER: Oh, yeah. When they found out about it on the David Letterman Show, of course, he went in the office laughing about it. You all won't believe this, but, you know, my sister ran into -- told the whole story. That's when the story broke. They knew exactly who it was. But you'll never hear about it over there, no.

GLENN: Unbelievable. Unbelievable.

CALLER: Yeah. But I don't appreciate anybody making someone else out to look like a racist, when clearly they are not, and she told the story honestly the first time. And it was fluky. I would love to be in on a conspiracy, believe me, because I just love you, Glenn. But there's nothing more to it.

I grew up there. And I went to high school with senators kids and diplomats. And we weren't a wealthy family by any stretch. But, you know, growing up in the area, it's not uncommon at all. Run into someone at the grocery store, that just happens, you know.

GLENN: Well, God bless you. I appreciate it. Say hello to your sister. I hope she ends up going on the record with the Blaze. We will tell the story as she tells it to us.

CALLER: Yeah. I wish she would.

PAT: Donna, I know the news department is trying to get in touch with her. They haven't had too much success. If you could assist in that, we would really appreciate it.

CALLER: Yeah, well, she teaches school during the day. She doesn't take off work for anything. You can get her in the afternoons. I just wanted to set the record straight. I hope she'll come on.

GLENN: Thank you, Donna, I appreciate it.

STU: Even go she doesn't come on, just text --

GLENN: Yeah. For the record. Let's set this record straight. It's obscene. In a country that's having the kind of race relations that we have right now, keep getting ratcheted up and ratcheted up, for the first lady to dig in her big basket of all the things, all the oppressions she's had to suffer suffered through, to come through and say, that's her story, when it's been told before, completely differently, and the person who asked her is an Obama supporter.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Times ten.

STU: I mean, how on earth do you leave this situation continuing to be an Obama supporter? How can you see the way they manipulate racial relations for their own benefit, when you're involved --

GLENN: How do you continue to work -- how do you continue to work at that news organization? How do you do that?

STU: I don't know.

GLENN: When it is your wife and everybody knows. And now it is your wife, and here's a story in "People" magazine, where she's changing history. Barack knows, you got to change our history. She's changing history. And it's your wife. And everybody in the office knows, that's your wife. Don't you have a little righteous indignation and say, guys, you either correct this story because this is about my wife. I know nobody knows this is about my wife. This is important. This is important. To me. To my wife. This hurts my wife. We're supporters. We have no axe to grind. This story needs to be corrected.

And if they don't, why wouldn't you walk. Do you have no credibility? Do you have no honor and integrity? Is there not a chivalrous bone in your body for your wife? How do you continue to work there?

STU: If they won't tell that story thank they actually have it through one of their employees, if they won't tell that story to protect them, how can you possibly work there? These people are willing to wreck your wife.

GLENN: Yeah, they're willing to let your wife go through a buzz saw. This isn't even a big story. So if they're willing to do this to your wife, so what, she's in a wood chipper. Oh, well. And you're willing to let your wife go through the wood chipper, when the chips are down, so to speak. When things are really important, how do you trust that you know what the news are S? How do you trust you are getting the truth?

STU: If you work at this particular establishment, you don't care about the truth.

GLENN: I disagree with that. I think these people are so -- they're so -- they've had to convince themselves of two things. One, either the ends justify the means. I think this is the deal. It wasn't that important of a story. Nobody knows. It's going to be gone. Why dig all this up. It will only put your wife in the spotlight, and you don't want that to happen. So they've just convinced themselves. Ends justify the means.

STU: Maybe. Let me ask you this: Donna is a caller. Our news department is making sure everything is buttoned up on this story. As of now, it's not a news story, it's just a caller. You listen to her. Do you believe her?

GLENN: Yes, I do.

STU: She sounds completely credible. That's not enough for a news story. It's an amazing thing. It doesn't sound like she has a huge axe to grind. She wants to protect her sister. That's a human instinct.

GLENN: And, you know what, because her sister -- this story is easy to verify. It's easy to verify once you have the names. It's easy to verify, does that person work there? Does that person do this? You're not going to say, and her husband works for this person at this network, because, I mean, who -- who has done that kind of thinking. And how would you know -- I mean, we very well could know that individual? Someone in our organization, I can guarantee you, knows that individual. So nobody sits there and makes that up.

STU: No. And she gave a lot of different details to the initial call. Sounds -- but, again, this is why you have a news organization.

GLENN: I know.

JEFFY: She even said that, I know her name isn't out there, but I was mad because I knew it was my sister.

GLENN: But her sister talking to the producers yesterday, talking to the news people yesterday, her sister said, she was mad. She's a supporter and everything else. But she's mad.

STU: Wouldn't you be?

GLENN: Yes. I would be.

STU: Especially because she's probably spent hundreds of hours defending these people. She's probably sat there with some conservative, her sister, around a Thanksgiving table and said, no, you're wrong about these people. That's not what they do. And now here she is a victim of it.

GLENN: Doing it to you.

STU: I mean, that is crushing. That's crushing.

Front page image courtesy of the AP.

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

PHILL MAGAKOE / Contributor | Getty Images

Kirk’s tragic death challenges us to rise above fear and anger, to rebuild bridges where others build walls, and to fight for the America he believed in.

I’ve only felt this weight once before. It was 2001, just as my radio show was about to begin. The World Trade Center fell, and I was called to speak immediately. I spent the day and night by my bedside, praying for words that could meet the moment.

Yesterday, I found myself in the same position. September 11, 2025. The assassination of Charlie Kirk. A friend. A warrior for truth.

Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins.

Moments like this make words feel inadequate. Yet sometimes, words from another time speak directly to our own. In 1947, Dylan Thomas, watching his father slip toward death, penned lines that now resonate far beyond his own grief:

Do not go gentle into that good night. / Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Thomas was pleading for his father to resist the impending darkness of death. But those words have become a mandate for all of us: Do not surrender. Do not bow to shadows. Even when the battle feels unwinnable.

Charlie Kirk lived that mandate. He knew the cost of speaking unpopular truths. He knew the fury of those who sought to silence him. And yet he pressed on. In his life, he embodied a defiance rooted not in anger, but in principle.

Picking up his torch

Washington, Jefferson, Adams — our history was started by men who raged against an empire, knowing the gallows might await. Lincoln raged against slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. raged against segregation. Every generation faces a call to resist surrender.

It is our turn. Charlie’s violent death feels like a knockout punch. Yet if his life meant anything, it means this: Silence in the face of darkness is not an option.

He did not go gently. He spoke. He challenged. He stood. And now, the mantle falls to us. To me. To you. To every American.

We cannot drift into the shadows. We cannot sit quietly while freedom fades. This is our moment to rage — not with hatred, not with vengeance, but with courage. Rage against lies, against apathy, against the despair that tells us to do nothing. Because there is always something you can do.

Even small acts — defiance, faith, kindness — are light in the darkness. Reaching out to those who mourn. Speaking truth in a world drowning in deceit. These are the flames that hold back the night. Charlie carried that torch. He laid it down yesterday. It is ours to pick up.

The light may dim, but it always does before dawn. Commit today: I will not sleep as freedom fades. I will not retreat as darkness encroaches. I will not be silent as evil forces claim dominion. I have no king but Christ. And I know whom I serve, as did Charlie.

Two turning points, decades apart

On Wednesday, the world changed again. Two tragedies, separated by decades, bound by the same question: Who are we? Is this worth saving? What kind of people will we choose to be?

Imagine a world where more of us choose to be peacemakers. Not passive, not silent, but builders of bridges where others erect walls. Respect and listening transform even the bitterest of foes. Charlie Kirk embodied this principle.

He did not strike the weak; he challenged the powerful. He reached across divides of politics, culture, and faith. He changed hearts. He sparked healing. And healing is what our nation needs.

At the center of all this is one truth: Every person is a child of God, deserving of dignity. Change will not happen in Washington or on social media. It begins at home, where loneliness and isolation threaten our souls. Family is the antidote. Imperfect, yes — but still the strongest source of stability and meaning.

Mark Wilson / Staff | Getty Images

Forgiveness, fidelity, faithfulness, and honor are not dusty words. They are the foundation of civilization. Strong families produce strong citizens. And today, Charlie’s family mourns. They must become our family too. We must stand as guardians of his legacy, shining examples of the courage he lived by.

A time for courage

I knew Charlie. I know how he would want us to respond: Multiply his courage. Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins. Out of darkness, great and glorious things will sprout — but we must be worthy of them.

Charlie Kirk lived defiantly. He stood in truth. He changed the world. And now, his torch is in our hands. Rage, not in violence, but in unwavering pursuit of truth and goodness. Rage against the dying of the light.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck is once again calling on his loyal listeners and viewers to come together and channel the same unity and purpose that defined the historic 9-12 Project. That movement, born in the wake of national challenges, brought millions together to revive core values of faith, hope, and charity.

Glenn created the original 9-12 Project in early 2009 to bring Americans back to where they were in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. In those moments, we weren't Democrats and Republicans, conservative or liberal, Red States or Blue States, we were united as one, as America. The original 9-12 Project aimed to root America back in the founding principles of this country that united us during those darkest of days.

This new initiative draws directly from that legacy, focusing on supporting the family of Charlie Kirk in these dark days following his tragic murder.

The revival of the 9-12 Project aims to secure the long-term well-being of Charlie Kirk's wife and children. All donations will go straight to meeting their immediate and future needs. If the family deems the funds surplus to their requirements, Charlie's wife has the option to redirect them toward the vital work of Turning Point USA.

This campaign is more than just financial support—it's a profound gesture of appreciation for Kirk's tireless dedication to the cause of liberty. It embodies the unbreakable bond of our community, proving that when we stand united, we can make a real difference.
Glenn Beck invites you to join this effort. Show your solidarity by donating today and honoring Charlie Kirk and his family in this meaningful way.

You can learn more about the 9-12 Project and donate HERE

The critical difference: Rights from the Creator, not the state

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.

Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.

This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.

This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.

From Muhammad to Marx

The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.

Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.

Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.

This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.

Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Is Gen Z’s anger over housing driving them toward socialism?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Do you think the Gen Z support for Trump is an opportunity for conservatives to win them over with anti-establishment reforms that preserve liberty?