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

Glenn: ‘Get Involved’ but ‘Be a Human Being First, Political Animal Last’

September 05, 2017
Staff

WRITER

In an era of political struggle that is often petty, sometimes we need to hear stories of real human struggle to regain perspective.

Glenn shared a moving story about a nun who had been persecuted and was trying to fight for Christians in the Middle East on radio last week. She was called in via Skype from the Iraqi desert — where she lived in a metal shipping container — to share her message about what was happening to Christians in Iraq.

Not at all concerned for herself, the nun focused on her message. “She said, ‘Thank you so much for helping me get the word out,’” Glenn remembered. “I broke down.”

America is at a crossroads in this time of conflict.

“This is when we actually decide, which way are we going?” Glenn said.

He encouraged people to stand for their principles while still remembering that being human is far more important than being political.

“Get involved and allow yourself … to be a human being first and a political animal last,” he said.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

When we started the Nazarene Fund two years ago, somebody asked me this just the other day: What started that? That was me sitting in my office -- or, sitting in my studio. And Johnnie Moore had just come by, and he had said, "There's a huge problem. We -- these -- these Christians and Yazidis are just being crucified and sold into slavery." And he said, "We're trying to get these 50 families out." He and Mark Burnett, I think 50 families out.

And they needed a million dollars to do it.

And I -- I said, "We're going to help you on that. We'll raise a million dollars. We'll get them out."

But what happened just before that was the turning point. I was on television. And there was a nun who was trying to get to the United States, just to testify in front of Congress on what was really happening to these Christians.

And we had a Skype interview with her. And she was living in this -- this container, cargo container, and it was in the middle of Iraq. And it was in early August. In the desert in Iraq.

Now, mangle, living your life in a metal box in the middle of the Iraqi desert in August. I don't think that's very cool. You know, there's no windows. There's nothing. And she's broadcasting her Skype on phone, in the middle of this container.

And she was talking about how she needed help to get into the United States because people needed to hear the message. And she was talking about everything. And she wasn't complaining about her situation at all. And it was weird. Because I almost had tunnel vision. I stopped listening to her. And I'm just looking at her in this metal box. And I'm starting to imagine what just her life is like, and that she's not asking anything for her. She's not saying, "Hey, help me. Help me." She's saying, "I got to get to the United States because the people here are suffering. Not me. The people around me are suffering."

And I thought to myself, what the hell am I doing with my life? I'm sitting in this air-conditioned studio, and here's this woman actually standing up in a time that is beginning to look like the 1930s in several places around the world.

And I'm sitting here doing, what? And she said, "Thank you so much for helping me get the word out." And I don't know if you saw that episode, but I just -- I broke down. Not unusual for me. I broke down. And I just said, "I'm sorry, Sister, but I haven't really even listened to what you were even saying. Because I just realized, what am I doing with my life? What are we doing?"

That was the moment for me that I decided to get involved. And there's been some other things here recently, I've -- I told you recently. And we'll go over it this fall, as we go on. But I want you to know, I've -- look, I've told you about the Nazis rising up ten years ago. I told you about the communists and the Nazis. And showed you that this has happened in the 1900s, the early 1900s under Wilson. It happened under -- it happened under FDR as well, the Nazis and the communists. They fight. And they closed down shippings, and they try to close down ports. And they try to close down capitalism. Both of them. Both sides.

And Americans have to be good enough to navigate between those two things. Told you about that for -- ten years ago.

And I've warned you for a long time, these things are about to come. And when they do, they will be overwhelming. And even the very elect will be lost, even the people who you love and adore and really get it, they're going to be lost, because it's going to be overwhelming.

As I said to you over the last probably month, something deep inside of me has changed. The seasons have changed. We are in a new era.

We are -- we have finished writing the beginning of what America and the world is going through. And we're now writing the all-important middle. This is when we actually decide which way are we going? You're watching a three-act play. The first shows you the life that people had before and then the conflict. And then the second act is them going through the conflict, and it leads to a pivot point or a choice. Curtain.

Then act three. How do they solve it? We're now entering act two.

And I -- I urge you to look at the possibilities in front of us. I urge you. The good possibilities. I urge you to look at the -- the -- the wake-up call that we're getting right now.

Because this is going to go back to politics, just like it did after September 11th. It's going to go back, and it's probably going to be worse than -- than it was a week or so ago. This is a chance for you to strengthen yourself, to find shelter, to find peace, to find your heart again, and to figure out, okay. If I don't want to go back to feeling that way, how do I guard my heart? How do I stay there? Because the lions are coming again to rip us apart and use politics and economic strife to do it.

Get involved. And allow yourself -- it sounds so weird. But allow yourself to be a human being first and a political animal last.

POLL: What topics do YOU want Trump and Harris to debate?

Montinique Monroe / Stringer, Win McNamee / Staff | Getty Images

Does Kamala Harris stand a chance against Donald Trump in a debate?

Next week, during the second presidential debate, we will find out. The debate is scheduled for September 10th and will be hosted by ABC anchors David Muir and Linsey Davis. This will be the second presidential debate, but the first for VP Kamala Harris, and will feature the same rules as the first debate. The rules are: no notes, no chairs, no live audience, and the debater's microphone will only be turned on when it is his or her turn to speak.

This will be the first time Trump and Harris clash face-to-face, and the outcome could have a massive effect on the outcome of the election. Trump has been preparing by ramping up his campaign schedule. He plans to hold multiple rallies and speak at several events across the next several days. He wants to be prepared to face any question that might come his way, and meeting and interacting with both voters and the press seems to be Trump's preferred preparation approach.

With the multitude of issues plaguing our nation, there are a lot of potential topics that could be brought up. From the economy to the ongoing "lawfare" being waged against the former president, what topics do YOU want Harris and Trump to debate?

The economy (and why the Biden-Harris administration hasn't fixed it yet)

The Southern Border crisis (and Kamala's performance as border czar)

Climate change (and how Trump pulled out of the Paris Agreement)

The "lawfare" being waged against Trump (and what Trump would do if he were thrown in prison) 

Voting and election security (and how to deal with the possibility that illegal immigrants are voting)

3 ways the Constitution foils progressive authoritarianism

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / Contributor, Kevin Dietsch / Staff, Pool / Pool | Getty Images

This is why it is important to understand our history.

Over the weekend, the New York Times published a controversial article claiming the Constitution is a danger to the country and a threat to democracy. To those who have taken a high school American government class or have followed Glenn for a while, this claim might seem incongruent with reality. That's because Jennifer Szalai, the author the piece, isn't thinking of the Constitution as it was intended to be—a restraint on government to protect individual rights—but instead as a roadblock that is hindering the installation of a progressive oligarchy.

Glenn recently covered this unbelievable article during his show and revealed the telling critiques Szalai made of our founding document. She called it an "anti-democratic" document and argued it is flawed because Donald Trump used it to become president (sort of like how every other president achieved their office). From here, Szalai went off the deep end and made some suggestions to "fix" the Constitution, including breaking California and other blue states away from the union to create a coastal progressive utopia.

Here are three of the "flaws" Szalai pointed out in the Constitution that interfere with the Left's authoritarian dreams:

1. The Electoral College

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The New York Times article brought up the fact that in 2016 President Trump lost the popular vote but won the Electoral College, and thus won the election. This, as Szalai pointed out, is not democratic. Strictly speaking, she is right. But as Glenn has pointed out time and time again, America is not a democracy! The Founding Fathers did not want the president to be decided by a simple majority of 51 percent of the population. The Electoral College is designed to provide minority groups with a voice, giving them a say in the presidential election. Without the Electoral College, a simple majority would dominate elections and America would fall under the tyranny of the masses.

2. The Supreme Court

OLIVIER DOULIERY / Contributor | Getty Images

President Biden and other progressives have thrown around the idea of reforming the Supreme Court simply because it has made a few rulings they disagree with. Glenn points out that when a country decides to start monkeying around with their high courts, it is usually a sign they are becoming a banana republic. Szalai complained that Trump was allowed to appoint three justices. Two of them were confirmed by senators representing just 44 percent of the population, and they overturned Roe v. Wade. All of this is Constitutional by Szalai's admission, and because she disagreed with it, she argued the whole document should be scrapped.

3. Republicanism

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

To clarify, were not talking about the Republican Party Republicanism, but instead the form of government made up of a collection of elected representatives who govern on the behalf of their constituents. This seems to be a repeat sticking point for liberals, who insist conservatives and Donald Trump are out to destroy "democracy" (a system of government that never existed in America). This mix-up explains Szalai's nonsensical interpretation of how the Constitution functions. She criticized the Constitution as "anti-democratic" and a threat to American democracy. If the Constitution is the nation's framework, and if it is "anti-democratic" then how is it a threat to American democracy? This paradox is easily avoided with the understanding that America isn't a democracy, and it never has been.

Kamala Harris' first interview as nominee: Three SHOCKING policy flips

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

On Thursday, Kamala Harris gave her first interview since Joe Biden stepped down from the race, and it quickly becameclear why she waited so long.

Harris struggled to keep her story straight as CNN's Dana Bash questioned her about recent comments she had made that contradicted her previous policy statements. She kept on repeating that her "values haven't changed," but it is difficult to see how that can be true alongside her radical shift in policy. Either her values have changed or she is lying about her change in policy to win votes. You decide which seems more likely.

During the interview, Harris doubled down on her policy flip on fracking, the border, and even her use of the race card. Here are her top three flip-flops from the interview:

Fracking

Citizens of the Planet / Contributor | Getty Images

In 2019, during the 2020 presidential election, Harris pledged her full support behind a federal ban on fracking during a town hall event. But, during the DNC and again in this recent interview, Harris insisted that she is now opposed to the idea. The idea of banning fracking has been floated for a while now due to environmental concerns surrounding the controversial oil drilling method. Bans on fracking are opposed by many conservatives as it would greatly limit the production of oil in America, thus driving up gas prices across the nation. It seems Harris took this stance to win over moderates and to keep gas prices down, but who knows how she will behave once in office?

Border

PATRICK T. FALLON / Contributor | Getty Images

In her 2020 presidential bid, Harris was all for decriminalizing the border, but now she is singing a different tune. Harris claimed she is determined to secure the border—as if like she had always been a stalwart defender of the southern states. Despite this policy reversal, Harris claimed her values have not changed, which is hard to reconcile. The interviewer even offered Kamala a graceful out by suggesting she had learned more about the situation during her VP tenure, but Kamala insisted she had not changed.

Race

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

When asked to respond to Trump's comments regarding the sudden emergence of Kamala's black ancestry Kamala simply answered "Same old tired playbook, next question" instead of jumping on the opportunity to play the race card as one might expect. While skipping the critical race theory lecture was refreshing, it came as a shock coming from the candidate representing the "everything is racist" party. Was this just a way to deflect the question back on Trump, or have the Democrats decided the race card isn't working anymore?

The REAL questions that CNN should ask Kamala tonight

KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

The Democrats don't want the American people to know who they are voting for. It has been well over a month since Biden dropped out of the presidential race and Kamala was hastily installed in his place. During that time, Kamala has not given a single interview.

The Democrats' intention is clear: they have spent the last month gaslighting the American left into believing that Kamala is their new "super-candidate." Now that they've taken the bait, they can allow Kamala to take a softball interview to combat accusations from the Right.

Kamala's first interview will be hosted by Dana Bash on CNN and is scheduled for 9:00 p.m. ET tonight. Kamala will be joined by her running mate, Tim Walz, for an unusual interview. Between the tag-team approach and the more-than-sympathetic interviewer, it's almost certain that this will not be a particularly substantial interview full of easy, soft-ball, questions.

The American people deserve to know who is on the ballot, and that means that they should be able to see how their candidates stand up against tough questions. Here are five questions that CNN should ask Kamala tonight:

Will she build a border wall?

SOPA Images / Contributor | Getty Images

After years of bashing Trump for his proposed border wall, Kamala has suddenly changed her mind. During the DNC, Kamala pledged to support a bill that included money for a border wall and other border security measures. This change seems like a knee-jerk response to recent criticisms made about her abysmal performance as the "border czar." The question is: how genuine is it?

What is her stance on the Israel-Hamas war?

BASHAR TALEB / Contributor | Getty Images

Kamala has been mushy on the issue of the Israel-Hamas war so far. She said that she would support Israel while simultaneously expressing sympathy for the Palestinians in Gaza. With mounting pro-Hamas support within the American left, just how far is Kamala willing to go?

How does she explain defending Biden against allegations that he was too old for office now that those allegations have proven true?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

For the last four years, Kamala and the entire mainstream media have vehemently defended President Biden's mental fitness, despite countless incidents that indicated otherwise. After Biden's senile performance at the June presidential debate, the truth couldn't be hidden any longer, and Kamala was quickly swapped into his place. Now that the cat's out of the bag, how does Kamala justify her lies to protect the incompetent president?

How does she plan on fixing the economy, and why hasn't she already done it?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

Kamala has claimed that she could lower consumer prices starting on the first day of her administration, accompanied by other promises to fix the economy. So why the wait? If she knows how to fix the economy that is causing so many Americans to suffer, can't she do something right now as the Vice President? Why has the economy only gotten worse within her three-year tenure in the White House?

Why does she keep flipping on her policies? Where does it stop?

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

As mentioned above, Kamala has already changed her stance on a border wall, but it doesn't end there. During her 2019 presidential campaign, Kamala vowed to end fracking, a controversial method of drilling for oil, in the name of climate change. But now it seems her position has softened, with no mention of a fracking ban. Why does she keep changing her stance on these major policies? What other policies has she changed without any indication? Why has she so far failed to produce a clear campaign platform?