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

I’m Lovin’ It: Former Obama Press Secretary now works at McDonald’s

June 10, 2015
Staff

WRITER

Where do you go after the White House? If you’re former press secretary Robert Gibbs, it seems like you just move from one clown to another. McDonald’s has brought Gibbs on as their new global director of communications with the hope he can clean up their image and help open doors in Washington. Yes, government is so out of control that it now makes total sense for a burger company to need a man with access in D.C.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment:

GLENN: McDonald's has introduced kale to its menu. And now they've hired Robert Gibbs. If you know who Robert Gibbs is -- a friend of mine was just on a plane. Was coming back from someplace and was sitting there. And her passport was in her hand. She fell asleep on takeoff. Her passport fell on the ground. Slid across the aisle. She didn't wake up. A guy reaches over. Picks it up. Holds it. And just holds it while she's asleep. She wakes up. And he says, I'm sorry. Your passport, you know, fell out of your hands when you fell asleep on takeoff. She said, oh, thank you. And they started this conversation. It was a nice conversation. He said, yeah -- she said, what were you doing here? He said, I just got a chance to see the Rolling Stones.

Took my son or daughter to the rolling stone. Went back stages. Got a chance to meet. She was like, how did you pull that off? He said, well, I used to have a pretty good job that kind of opened some doors like that for me. She said, wow, really? Like what did you do? And he said --

PAT: Former White House press secretary.

GLENN: He said, quote, seriously? That was his response. Seriously? And she said, yeah. What job did you have? And he said, I used to work at a big house, it was all white, and I'm probably the most second hated man in America. And she went, oh, my gosh. I used to scream at you on my television.

[laughter]

And it was Robert Gibbs. And now Robert Gibbs is going to work at McDonald's because they want to, quote, be a progressive burger company.

STU: He'll work as a cashier or what's his role? He's not qualified for that, quite. But maybe those --

GLENN: I don't know. Maybe they're having real problems, and he'll be like, look, I just want to tell you, your burger didn't taste as bad as you thought it did. What? Your burger, no, that's -- that's real meat.

STU: We gave you a Whopper. I'm telling you we gave you a Whopper.

GLENN: That's actually what he would say.

PAT: I eat Whoppers every day.

GLENN: I was thinking, no, Stu, it's McDonald's. No. That's Robert Gibbs --

STU: Yeah, he would lie about the burger. Yes, he would.

GLENN: Yeah. This is Burger King. You were eating at Burger King, I don't know what you're talking about.

JEFFY: He'll be a little bit higher up than the burger flipper. Just a little.

GLENN: Still beneath the clown?

JEFFY: Well, everyone is beneath the clown.

GLENN: Some things never change. Working for a clown then, working for a clown now.

PAT: Well, he's Executive Vice President, Global Chief Communications Officer. Isn't that what he is?

GLENN: Come on. Who thought this guy was good?

JEFFY: He'll be in charge of the company's communications and government affairs.

GLENN: Okay. Stop. McDonald's has government affairs?

PAT: Come on.

GLENN: McDonald's has government affairs?

JEFFY: That's what it says.

GLENN: I'm going to raise my hand again. Never again is right now. Raise your hand with me. When McDonald's, a burger company needs someone in government affairs, that's a problem. It's no longer the United States of America anymore.

STU: Yeah, that's a great point. Because there probably are a lot of reasons they need him -- I don't know what they are. They probably do. It's sad. They should be out of the business completely.

GLENN: Well, was the government trying to sell the pink slime, or was the fast food restaurants trying to sell that pink slime? Because if you're either selling buying or selling that pink slime stuff, then you would need the government. Because you would need to buy it from the government, if the government was selling it, or you would need to get the government to turn the other -- you need somebody to go, look, look over there while they're making the pink slime.

STU: When you're in a situation where the biggest city in America had a mayor who was trying to ban large soda cups. There are threats of lawsuits all the time that they're responsible for people's health. They are constantly being targeted by people who are saying that they had to make their portions smaller. Have you seen a McDonald's happy meal fry lately? I literally mean it singular. It's like one fry in the box. It's like a shot glass full of fries. It's adorable.

PAT: And instead, you get an apple or something.

STU: You get four fries and a little bag of apple slices.

GLENN: I don't want the apple slices. As Jim Gaffigan pointed out on yesterday's program, we don't go to McDonald's because we want to jog. We're not going for a run after McDonald's. It's not like we feel good about ourselves. That's why we go to McDonald's. You're going to make me feel good -- I'm not going to eat the crappy apples, man. If I wanted apples, I would go to any other place than McDonald's.

I want that crap that is almost entirely not organic. I want that stuff that is, in fact, so nonorganic, I don't think the meat actually came from an animal. That's what I'm there for. Give it to me.

STU: Yeah. And I guess they have to have someone -- I mean, you certainly don't hire Robert Gibbs because you believe he's good at his job. You hire Robert Gibbs because he knows people.

GLENN: Isn't that a problem? We're no longer a meritocracy.

PAT: Well, he was one of the worst press secretaries of all time. There's just no doubt about that.

GLENN: The guy -- he shouldn't be --

STU: He should be cleaning the grease out if he will work at McDonald.

GLENN: Yeah, he's not the guy that you put in charge of anything, when it comes to corporate communications.

STU: But he has close friends who owe him favors all over the government, and that's how you get big jobs.

GLENN: That's bad. We're no longer a meritocracy.

STU: Yeah.

PAT: So listen to the statement from the CEO, Steve Easterbrook: Robert is a highly respected, talented leader who will bring a wealth of experience and outside perspective to McDonald's as we build a more modern progressive burger company.

Does he know what he's saying when he says that? Is it progressive in that we want to espouse --

GLENN: Engage in eugenics.

PAT: No. Obviously not eugenics. Unless they're killing cows, which they are.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh, they're what?

PAT: They're killing cows.

GLENN: What? I didn't know that.

PAT: Actually it may be seaweed. There's a lot of carrageenan in that. Obviously, if they want to espouse that ideology, they want to push forward some agenda. Maybe they want to be more active in the progressive movement. But is that what he means? Or does he mean, we just want to move forward in the world?

GLENN: I take Levi's at their words when they said they wanted to be the progressive uniform of the future. They knew what they were saying because they were showing revolution on the street while they were saying it. So they knew exactly what they were saying. McDonald's, I can't imagine that they're like -- can you?

STU: They are putting kale on the menu.

GLENN: Yeah, but that's --

PAT: And quinoa.

GLENN: You can say that's progressive, and we'll make progress, and we'll be that forward-thinking healthier -- nobody is going to go there. Is anybody going to McDonald's because all of a sudden they're healthy?

PAT: No.

GLENN: The only reason to go is because you just have this -- I don't know, they put some chemical in it that just makes you have to go like once a month. And then you have to go like every 20 minutes. But you go there and it's because you're like, I just have to have some of that garbage food in me.

STU: Oh, yeah. That's great.

GLENN: There's nothing wrong with a little garbage from time to time. And those apple pies, which when we were kids, they didn't have real apples in them.

PAT: They were made of plastic.

GLENN: They were almost made of plastic. They had real sugar in it at the time. It was sugar, plastic, and then some sort of a crust that I don't think had actual flour in it.

STU: I think they call it a casing.

GLENN: Yeah, genetic casing. Like a sheep's lining or something. They would just deep fry --

PAT: Put it under a spigot and just shoot it into the --

GLENN: That was good. When they used to -- because then they were like, we're having a baked apple pie. That was not nearly as good as the flaming hot apple pie that used to come out --

PAT: That was deep fat fried.

GLENN: Oh, it was so good. Remember, you would have almost like a -- like a -- a welt in the top of your mouth. Your skin would -- a blister. The whole top of your mouth would be a blister. After you would eat it, you would have to peel the skin off the roof of your mouth. Because they were so hot. It was like 4,000 degrees when they would hand it to you.

PAT: But that was the beginning of the end. When they started baking the apple pies.

GLENN: That was the beginning of the end. Oh, we can't have all that grease on it. That's what makes it good! You're McDonald's. Have you seen the complexion of the guy who is your spokesman? He's got white makeup on and big, huge red lips. And I think the red lips were from eating the really hot apple pies. That wasn't makeup. It's not like, I want to look a little more like the clown. He looks healthy.

PAT: Plus, how big are his feet? Have you seen his shoes? Massive. Massive.

STU: If you have a clown for your spokesperson before, and now you have a new one.

PAT: Yes.

STU: It is the same philosophies.

GLENN: So how do we feel -- what's the verdict before we move on? I mean on the progressive thing.

PAT: I'm done defending McDonald's. I'm done.

GLENN: You know what, I'm comfortable there. I was going to say, I don't know if I can go to McDonald's again, but I don't go to McDonald's. My wife goes to McDonald. She brings the kids.

STU: That's the theory, by the way, behind the kale and the quinoa. It's not because people like us will go there and order it. It's because you have kids. And your wife is bringing them to McDonald's, and she doesn't want to eat Quarter Pounders with cheese. She wants to eat something that's mildly healthy, so they can get her something where she doesn't feel terrible about what she's ordering there, and they get to go play in the play place.

GLENN: Yeah, that's fine.

PAT: But when the lefties are calling them a big, fat organization, a big corporation that doesn't care about their workers -- I'm going to say yep. You're right. They suck. McDonald's sucks.

GLENN: You made a good case. I think they actually mean it. Because they know that everyone's fast food workers, $15 an hour. That's why they hired Robert Gibbs. It's because they know -- to defend against that and say, no, we're a good progressive -- you know what, I hate them. The more I think about them, the more I hate them.

PAT: Yeah, it's over.

STU: They're defending against lawsuits. They're defending against fat shaming.

PAT: All this is a preemptive strike against all that.

GLENN: Yeah. It should be the opposite way.

STU: Yeah, use Burger King as your --

PAT: Look at those guys.

STU: Don't use us as the example. We have Robert Gibbs. Use one of these other crappy places.

PAT: Yep.

GLENN: You know what their strategy is? And I think it's because their product comes from the same source. They have the same PR as big oil. Look at BP. Beyond Petroleum. Bullcrap. You're not Beyond Petroleum. You're an oil company.

[laughter]

We're Beyond Petroleum. No, you're not. Who does that?

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Look, we're really proud of what we make. We have changed the world. But we're going to get out of this the first chance we can. It's like they -- they think they're selling heroin or something.

STU: They just recognize the PR climate and are trying to bail themselves out of it.

GLENN: Isn't America just at the point where you're like, yep, we're a big oil company. We've changed the world. And we'll continue to change the world. And when somebody comes up with a better idea, we'll be on board. Until that time, saddle up. Come on over here. We'll fill your tank with some really great gasoline. Then you can stop at McDonald's and get some really nasty food.

Why the White House restoration sent the left Into panic mode

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.

Trump’s secret war in the Caribbean EXPOSED — It’s not about drugs

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.