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 immovable. Abortion is murder’: Glenn explains why he is pro-life

January 22, 2014
Radio Clips

The Glenn Beck Program

Glenn opened this morning’s radio program with a candid monologue about why he is pro-life. In light of New York Governor Andrew Cuomo’s recent comments about “right-to-life” “extreme conservatives” not being welcome in his state and prominent Republicans and Democrats stating abortion will be a major theme this election cycle, Glenn decided it was time to broach the sensitive subject and explain why he believes abortion is murder.

Well, get ready. Both political parties have said that they plan to make abortion one of the main issues this election year. Now, why are they doing that? Well, let me give you a real quick snapshot on Cuomo. The reason why Cuomo came out and said: There's no place for people who are pro-life and everything else is because of Bill de Blasio. Bill has taken the party over in New York, and the Democrats have fully gone leftist in New York. Governor Cuomo is deciding now that he's got to play a role in that, so he's got to go as hard left as he possibly can.

This show, while all of us here feel passionately about abortion, we are intensely pro-life, we have never really focused on it. In fact, it was one of those topics that we said we will never really talk about. We don't want to get into that because it's so divisive, et cetera, et cetera. And when you have a discussion about it, you just go back and forth in circles and you usually get shouted down with some bull crap about back alley clinics and a war on women. But since it's about to become a major election issue, and since New York Governor Cuomo has just made being pro-life a big reason for not being welcome in his state, I am going to talk about it.

The biggest problem with this debate is that we as conservatives have lost it. We lost it the day we allowed abortion supporters to get away with the biggest language coup in the history of the world. And because of that coup, the other side is not for killing babies. They are not for mass genocide, which has taken the lives of 55 million children since 1973… They are pro-choice. If we were simply trying to decide whether we have, you know, Rice Krispies over Cap'n Crunch for breakfast, then I would understand calling it pro-choice.

Now, how did this happen in a conversation that is so unbelievably important? They still argue that all they really want is for [abortions] to be safe and rare. But that's all. Rare and safe. Let's ask the tens of thousands of women in the horrific abortion mills in Philadelphia and Houston how safe their choice was in a story that the press didn't want to cover. Let's ask the untold women whose lives have been torn apart by that choice that you never see in the media because of an agenda. Mentally and physically the relationships that have been destroyed with massive regret for their entire life… Not to mention that with 1.2 to 2 million of those choices every year, adding up to 55 million since 1973. Doesn’t really seem to be that rare at all. Yeah, instead of the death of a baby, instead of the deaths of tens of millions of babies, including a disproportionate number of minorities… it is indeed just a woman's right to choose.

Forget about the choice that she had about her spouse or boyfriend or whoever had nine months earlier. See, that's where choice comes into play. That's where choice comes into play… Forget about the choice she makes at conception. None of that personal responsibility nonsense can even be considered. There can't be any consequences for anyone's actions today. No man must pay for his sins. You have to be allowed to choose what goes on with your body. Women need to choose what goes on in their body and with their body.

[…]

But there again, the debate gets side tracked. We can't even call what's in the womb life. Can't do that. It's not life at all… We have come so far in the past 40 years since Roe vs. Wade. Now it's some sort of inhuman abuse of women. It's an extreme violation to even ask a woman to look at what is growing inside of her. Before you make the ultimate, irreversible decision to end your baby's life, just look at the ultrasound, see what is inside of you. Look at how amazing this is. This is what we do if you're seeking an abortion in Texas. God bless the Republic of Texas. So why do abortion providers and supporters so vehemently oppose a pre-abortion ultrasound? Well, here's the reason. Because 90% of the women who have one realize what is in their womb is not tissue. It's not a knife. It's not a fork, a spoon, a shoe. It's a baby. It is her precious living human baby.

But the old adage is true. Control the language, control the argument, control society. Nothing proves that point more vividly than the abortion debate. The other side never even talks about a baby. No human life is even involved at all. In fact, the father and his wishes never, ever even enter into the equation. It's about a woman and her right to choose, never about the man. What does a man feel? If we object, we're of course waging a war on women. We're the oppressors.

We're the Nazis, which is really ironic, given the fact that again, 55 million human beings were killed in this country and we're the ones who are trying to desperately stop this genocide because we're the Nazis… It is a genocide, and I know that's strong language, but I'm sick and tired of pussyfooting around on the subject. It is time for strong language… It's murder… I'm immovable. Abortion is murder. Period… The left tries to tell us just as they do with global warming that the debate is over. It's all settled. Roe vs. Wade, 40 years ago. It's a Constitutional right. Really? Show me that Constitutional right. Show it to me… It doesn't exist. It doesn't exist in either of our founding documents. It doesn't exist in our Constitution. It doesn't exist in the Declaration of Independence. In fact, the preamble of the Constitution specifically protects the unborn. Let me read it for you:

We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, to establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, to provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, To ordain and establish this constitution for the United States of America.

Who are our posterity? Our unborn children – those who should be born and will be born. And the Declaration of Independence protects their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

[…]

But there are a couple of tough questions regarding abortion. And actually, the first one for me isn't tough at all: If the mother's life is in danger. I'm sorry, but if I have to choose between my wife and the mother of my children, and the baby, I'm choosing my wife. Does this make me inconsistent? Perhaps. Does it make me a flawed person? Perhaps it does. Maybe we'll try again for the baby, and Lord, forgive me, because I am only human. But I need her. My other children need her. I think most people are on board with that. Some people aren't. And that's fine. I'm flawed. I pray that I can have a better understanding.

But here's the really, really hard question. What about the real choice of the woman? What if her right to choose to create a baby was stolen from her [because of] rape? Now you have taken away her right to choose… If you're asking her to carry to term nine months, a baby from a monster – not the baby's fault, obviously – but from the woman's perspective, that reminder, that act of violence, that horrible violation, the trauma of that? I can't even begin to comprehend. And again, I know that makes me a flawed human. Maybe. I've tried. I guess some people would ask her to carry the baby full term because it is either killing a baby or it isn't. But if she can't deal with the baby because of the circumstances of conception once the baby is born, give her up for adoption. I understand, I have an adopted son. And he has changed my life. But if it is my wife or daughter, I can't demand that of her. Horrible flaw in me, I'm sure. But it is who I am today.

But I want to make it very clear: The only reason why they're going to talk about abortion is because they win. They will separate us and try to make us hate each other. The Republicans will do it to the Democrats and the Democrats will do it to the Republicans. Don't fall for that. But don't you dare shy away. We hold these truths to be self-evident for ourselves and our posterity. We must stand up, square our shoulders, and be better than we think we can be, as guardians of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

From Pharaoh to Hamas: The same spirit of evil, new disguise

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

The drone footage out of Gaza isn’t just war propaganda — it’s a glimpse of the same darkness that once convinced men they were righteous for killing innocents.

Evil introduces itself subtly. It doesn’t announce, “Hi, I’m here to destroy you.” It whispers. It flatters. It borrows the language of justice, empathy, and freedom, twisting them until hatred sounds righteous and violence sounds brave.

We are watching that same deception unfold again — in the streets, on college campuses, and in the rhetoric of people who should know better. It’s the oldest story in the world, retold with new slogans.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage.

A drone video surfaced this week showing Hamas terrorists staging the “discovery” of a hostage’s body. They pushed a corpse out of a window, dragged it into a hole, buried it, and then called in aid workers to “find” what they themselves had planted. It was theater — evil, disguised as victimhood. And it was caught entirely on camera.

That’s how evil operates. It never comes in through the front door. It sneaks in, often through manipulative pity. The same spirit animates the moral rot spreading through our institutions — from the halls of universities to the chambers of government.

Take Zohran Mamdani, a New York assemblyman who has praised jihadists and defended pro-Hamas agitators. His father, a Columbia University professor, wrote that America and al-Qaeda are morally equivalent — that suicide bombings shouldn’t be viewed as barbaric. Imagine thinking that way after watching 3,000 Americans die on 9/11. That’s not intellectualism. That’s indoctrination.

Often, that indoctrination comes from hostile foreign actors, peddled by complicit pawns on our own soil. The pro-Hamas protests that erupted across campuses last year, for example, were funded by Iran — a regime that murders its own citizens for speaking freely.

Ancient evil, new clothes

But the deeper danger isn’t foreign money. It’s the spiritual blindness that lets good people believe resentment is justice and envy is discernment. Scripture talks about the spirit of Amalek — the eternal enemy of God’s people, who attacks the weak from behind while the strong look away. Amalek never dies; it just changes its vocabulary and form with the times.

Today, Amalek tweets. He speaks through professors who defend terrorism as “anti-colonial resistance.” He preaches from pulpits that call violence “solidarity.” And he recruits through algorithms, whispering that the Jews control everything, that America had it coming, that chaos is freedom. Those are ancient lies wearing new clothes.

When nations embrace those lies, it’s not the Jews who perish first. It’s the nations themselves. The soul dies long before the body. The ovens of Auschwitz didn’t start with smoke; they started with silence and slogans.

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

A time for choosing

So what do we do? We speak truth — calmly, firmly, without venom. Because hatred can’t kill hatred; it only feeds it. Truth, compassion, and courage starve it to death.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage. That’s how Amalek survives — by making you fight him with his own weapons. The only victory that lasts is moral clarity without malice, courage without cruelty.

The war we’re fighting isn’t new. It’s the same battle between remembrance and amnesia, covenant and chaos, humility and pride. The same spirit that whispered to Pharaoh, to Hitler, and to every mob that thought hatred could heal the world is whispering again now — on your screens, in your classrooms, in your churches.

Will you join it, or will you stand against it?

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Bill Gates ends climate fear campaign, declares AI the future ruler

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The Big Tech billionaire once said humanity must change or perish. Now he claims we’ll survive — just as elites prepare total surveillance.

For decades, Americans have been told that climate change is an imminent apocalypse — the existential threat that justifies every intrusion into our lives, from banning gas stoves to rationing energy to tracking personal “carbon scores.”

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates helped lead that charge. He warned repeatedly that the “climate disaster” would be the greatest crisis humanity would ever face. He invested billions in green technology and demanded the world reach net-zero emissions by 2050 “to avoid catastrophe.”

The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch.

Now, suddenly, he wants everyone to relax: Climate change “will not lead to humanity’s demise” after all.

Gates was making less of a scientific statement and more of a strategic pivot. When elites retire a crisis, it’s never because the threat is gone — it’s because a better one has replaced it. And something else has indeed arrived — something the ruling class finds more useful than fear of the weather.The same day Gates downshifted the doomsday rhetoric, Amazon announced it would pay warehouse workers $30 an hour — while laying off 30,000 people because artificial intelligence will soon do their jobs.

Climate panic was the warm-up. AI control is the main event.

The new currency of power

The world once revolved around oil and gas. Today, it revolves around the electricity demanded by server farms, the chips that power machine learning, and the data that can be used to manipulate or silence entire populations. The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch. Whoever controls energy now controls information. And whoever controls information controls civilization.

Climate alarmism gave elites a pretext to centralize power over energy. Artificial intelligence gives them a mechanism to centralize power over people. The future battles will not be about carbon — they will be about control.

Two futures — both ending in tyranny

Americans are already being pushed into what look like two opposing movements, but both leave the individual powerless.

The first is the technocratic empire being constructed in the name of innovation. In its vision, human work will be replaced by machines, and digital permissions will subsume personal autonomy.

Government and corporations merge into a single authority. Your identity, finances, medical decisions, and speech rights become access points monitored by biometric scanners and enforced by automated gatekeepers. Every step, purchase, and opinion is tracked under the noble banner of “efficiency.”

The second is the green de-growth utopia being marketed as “compassion.” In this vision, prosperity itself becomes immoral. You will own less because “the planet” requires it. Elites will redesign cities so life cannot extend beyond a 15-minute walking radius, restrict movement to save the Earth, and ration resources to curb “excess.” It promises community and simplicity, but ultimately delivers enforced scarcity. Freedom withers when surviving becomes a collective permission rather than an individual right.

Both futures demand that citizens become manageable — either automated out of society or tightly regulated within it. The ruling class will embrace whichever version gives them the most leverage in any given moment.

Climate panic was losing its grip. AI dependency — and the obedience it creates — is far more potent.

The forgotten way

A third path exists, but it is the one today’s elites fear most: the path laid out in our Constitution. The founders built a system that assumes human beings are not subjects to be monitored or managed, but moral agents equipped by God with rights no government — and no algorithm — can override.

Hesham Elsherif / Stringer | Getty Images

That idea remains the most “disruptive technology” in history. It shattered the belief that people need kings or experts or global committees telling them how to live. No wonder elites want it erased.

Soon, you will be told you must choose: Live in a world run by machines or in a world stripped down for planetary salvation. Digital tyranny or rationed equality. Innovation without liberty or simplicity without dignity.

Both are traps.

The only way

The only future worth choosing is the one grounded in ordered liberty — where prosperity and progress exist alongside moral responsibility and personal freedom and human beings are treated as image-bearers of God — not climate liabilities, not data profiles, not replaceable hardware components.

Bill Gates can change his tune. The media can change the script. But the agenda remains the same.

They no longer want to save the planet. They want to run it, and they expect you to obey.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

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.