What's Being Said About Megyn Kelly on Social Media Is Shameful

With the number one New Year's resolution being a change of job, you'd think people would cut Megyn Kelly some slack for trying out a new opportunity. Yet, following her announcement that she was giving up her primetime spot at Fox News for a daytime slot at NBC, people reacted angrily on social media.

"I think she took a big pay cut to go there, so it shows me where her values and principles are, which I think is great. If it works out that it's better for her, even in her mind, I think that's fantastic. Here's what is crazy to me, just crazy. The number of people that are online now saying that she's not only a sellout, but a traitor, a traitor to her country for going to NBC," Glenn said Wednesday on radio.

When did someone leaving Fox News signify being a traitor?

"When did NBC become a place against the United States of America? When did we pledge our loyalty to Fox News?" Glenn asked.

Read below or listen to the full segment from Hour 1 for answers to these questions:

• Was Megyn Kelly fired?

• Will NBC be a bad influence on Megyn?

• Why did Megyn take a pay cut?

• Who made the list of possible replacements at Fox?

• Why does listener Kevin think Megyn is turning liberal?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

[soundcloud]

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:

GLENN: Conversation about a basic income experiment because what the future holds for us is extraordinarily different. We need to chart a course. Whether that's the answer or not, I don't know. I don't think it is, especially for America. But what is the answer? And what is truly coming? Big ideas around the corner.

Also, Megyn Kelly is leaving Fox. Obviously, Pat, they fired her, right?

PAT: Yes. Because she's on the air the rest of the week.

GLENN: Yeah.

PAT: And they like to fire people and then keep them on for a while afterwards. It's a really good idea.

GLENN: No, when they fired me, which clearly they did --

PAT: Clearly.

GLENN: -- they let me on the air for six solid months.

PAT: Six months. Yeah. So...

GLENN: Of course, Greta was off the same day. That's weird. That's really weird. But Megyn is leaving. And what's being said on Facebook about her is shameful.

PAT: Ridiculous.

GLENN: And who the replacement is according to the public, who do they want to replace Megyn Kelly? Boy, I am -- I'm really torn. I'm thrilled and excited, and at the same time, devastated if it would happen. We go there, right now.

(music)

GLENN: Oh. Thank you so much for tuning in. Here's Megyn Kelly last night saying goodbye to her audience on Fox.

MEGYN: This is a tough decision for me because I love this show. Our staff, our crew, my colleagues here at Fox.

And you, all of you, those who write me the lovely handwritten notes, asking about my kids and even those who very rarely complain on Twitter about our coverage after a show or a presidential debate, it's the kind of feeling that makes one feel connected to another human being. And that, after all, is why I believe we're here: Human connection.

The truth is, I need more of that in my life. In particular, when it comes to my children who are seven, five, and three. So I'll be leaving Fox News at the week's end and starting a new adventure, joining the journalists at NBC News who I deeply admire. I'll be anchoring a daytime show there, along with a Sunday night news magazine. And you'll see me there on the big nights too for politics and such.

I am very grateful to NBC for this opportunity, and I am deeply thankful to Fox News for the wonderful 12 years I have had here.

PAT: And to be leaving this hellhole now.

GLENN: I don't think she said --

PAT: That part was implied, I think.

GLENN: Really? I don't think --

(laughter)

She considers this a hellhole, you think?

PAT: I would guess.

GLENN: I don't think so.

PAT: That it's been tough for her since --

GLENN: Oh, no, it's been tough.

PAT: The last six months.

GLENN: I don't think anybody in her position leaves that place -- maybe -- without gratitude. I mean, even I left there with gratitude.

PAT: Yes. Yeah. I mean, true.

GLENN: With all the stuff that is going on behind the scenes --

PAT: But you know she is getting -- I don't know, she can't be being treated over there now. Do you think?

GLENN: No. No.

PAT: I mean, there's too many Trumpanistas over there who are pissed at her because she asked difficult questions of a presidential candidate. How dare she.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. I know.

So, you know, I think it has been hell for her. And I think it's -- you know, I don't know what the job is. So, you know, I think it's a good opportunity. Hopefully she will influence NBC more than they will influence her in many ways.

PAT: Yeah. The daytime talk show. Is she talking about MSNBC, do you think? Or is that --

GLENN: I don't know. I can't imagine her leaving -- well, you know --

PAT: I don't know. Really weird.

GLENN: MSNBC just hired Greta, so there's a possibility --

PAT: Oh, they did? I didn't even hear -- I hadn't heard that. Hmm.

GLENN: I haven't heard that either, maybe.

(laughter)

JEFFY: Really?

PAT: You --

GLENN: Somebody Google --

PAT: Did you just do it again?

JEFFY: Oh, my gosh.

GLENN: Google search that, please. Good God Almighty, Google search.

PAT: I think that's -- you might have just made some news.

GLENN: No, I don't think that's true. I don't think that's true at all. Somebody Google search that.

(laughter)

GLENN: Hey, that was --

PAT: Greta van Susteren to the --

JEFFY: While we're doing that, could be the whole package, right? She does stuff for MSNBC for online, for NBC. I mean, it could be the whole --

PAT: No. Okay. It's on Daily Caller.

GLENN: Okay. Thank you.

JEFFY: Eh.

GLENN: Woo.

PAT: She's making a quick and sudden return to cable news. 6:00 p.m. time slot at MSNBC.

GLENN: Right. So MSNBC is changing. I don't know what they're going to change to.

PAT: Yeah, yeah.

GLENN: But they are changing.

And, you know, they are -- they're looking for a new direction and a new -- I can't even say new direction. They're looking for new people with different voices. I do know that. Whether they're going to try to jam those in with what they already have, which seems to be a disaster to me -- I don't know.

And going on to MSNBC for Megyn Kelly seems like a pretty big step down.

PAT: Oh, yeah. Oh, no question about that.

GLENN: Daytime.

PAT: No question about that.

GLENN: Daytime Megyn Kelly. I wonder what they're paying her. Because apparently Fox offered her 20 million.

GLENN: They said they couldn't compete, and she took a large pay cut.

PAT: To go to MSNBC?

GLENN: Uh-huh.

PAT: Really? Well, then that tells you, doesn't it, that things have not been pleasant at Fox?

GLENN: Not necessarily.

PAT: I think --

JEFFY: No.

GLENN: It depends on what your goals are.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: I mean, her goals may not be --

PAT: To go from prime time to daily talk show? Eh, maybe. I don't know.

GLENN: No, that's not all it is.

Apparently, she's going to be one of the lead people, one of the leading voices for politics over there, which I think is big.

PAT: Yeah. Yeah. It's big.

GLENN: Remember, that's some of the -- it's Tom Brokaw. You know, the people made their livings, starting out just on the -- what do you call it? On the campaigns.

And is it a possibility that she's not doing a daily talk show on MSNBC, but possibly something along the lines of Kathie Lee?

PAT: Yeah. That was the other possibility I was kind of thinking. But it seems like time slot is already -- you wouldn't go past 10 o'clock in the morning, would you? Eastern time for that? Maybe.

GLENN: I don't know. Maybe. You have the whole west coast. You have the whole west coast. Maybe.

I don't know. But here's what I -- here's what I do think: One, it's clearly not about the money for her, which I'm glad. I was kind of watching this to see if this was a money move for her, where she would go. You know, because everybody said, "Oh, she's just playing them for the cash." Blah, blah. And I never thought that about Megyn. I think she's deeper than just going where the cash is.

So obviously that has happened. Because I think she took a big pay cut to go there. So it shows me where her values and principles are, which I think is great.

If she -- if it works out that it's better for her, even in her mind, I think that's fantastic. Here's what is crazy to me, just crazy, is the number of people that are online now saying that she's not only a sellout, but a traitor. A traitor to her country for going to -- go to NBC.

JEFFY: She betrayed her viewers. She disrespected our president-elect. Worst of all, you misrepresented who you really were all these years.

GLENN: Because she goes to work for NBC?

PAT: That is such bullcrap.

GLENN: When did NBC become a -- a place against the United States of America? When did we pledge our loyalty to Fox News? And, by the way, Fox News is currently saying that -- that Snowden or Julian Assange is a hero. I'm not sure that he's a hero. I'm not sure that I believe everything that he has said. I think it's an important conversation to have. But gosh, it was just a few years ago where Fox was saying he's absolutely a traitor and should be in prison. In the old days, he would have been executed. Now I believe everything that he says. It's an important discussion.

I'm glad that conversation happened on the air. I'm glad that Sean Hannity went over there and said that. That doesn't make Sean Hannity a traitor for doing that or a hero for doing that. It makes him a guy who wants to know the truth and went over and let us decide whether or not he's telling the truth or not. That's an important conversation to have.

Why is somebody who is leaving Fox News all of a sudden a traitor? This is out of control.

JEFFY: Good riddance. She always was a liberal whiner.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

PAT: This is unbelievable.

GLENN: Unbelievable.

PAT: It just -- it's pretty amazing because every -- it seems like every anchor, every news anchor, every reporter now has to adopt every sensibility of the president-elect. I've never seen anything like this.

JEFFY: Yeah.

PAT: If Trump doesn't like or likes somebody, everybody who voted for him must also like or not like that person.

GLENN: That's the same mentality that happened under Obama.

PAT: I don't -- I don't know that it is.

GLENN: Yes. It did.

PAT: I've never seen anything quite like this.

GLENN: Pat, it did. Because no one -- remember what we were saying. It's slightly different.

What we were saying at the time was, "Is there no one going to stand up?" They didn't shame each other, they just all fell in line. So they didn't have any traitors, if you will. They were all like, "It was a thrill up my leg." But you know that there were people there that were like, I don't know if I agree with all of that. I don't know if he's God. You know what I mean?

But they just never said anything. So there was nobody that fell out of line.

But do you really believe that they -- if somebody would have fallen out of line, that they would have killed them. And I don't mean that literally.

PAT: Right. Yes. Maybe.

GLENN: Seriously.

PAT: And it could be that I just -- I never expected this from the right. I just never thought that would happen because nobody fell in lockstep with absolutely everything George W. Bush said. We --

GLENN: Do you remember how much trouble we had though when -- when we fell out of step with him? Not to the degree at all by what's happening now.

PAT: Nowhere near. Nowhere near.

GLENN: But it was in that direction.

PAT: And there was -- I mean, with his immigration policy though, people weren't saying, "Well, yeah, all of a sudden, I welcome this comprehensive immigration plan." They weren't doing that then. They weren't doing that then.

GLENN: Yeah, that's true. That's true. That's true.

PAT: And many people disagreed with him on the Ramos and Compean situation and fought him hard on that. They disagreed with him and fought him hard on him siding with Mexico for that illegal alien rapist murderer that he was trying to save.

GLENN: That's true. That's true.

PAT: I didn't expect this from the right. So it's been pretty bizarre to see. It's been pretty weird.

GLENN: So I wish Megyn Kelly --

PAT: I do too.

GLENN: I wish her all the best.

PAT: And I hope she's making a fortune at MSNBC.

GLENN: I hope that she influences them and she's not influenced by them in any stereotypical negative way.

PAT: I hope so too. But that's hard. That's hard. When you're surround by it.

GLENN: And especially if you've been mistreated, you know --

PAT: By the other people.

GLENN: Yeah. I remember when I first went over to Fox. You know, I think one of the things that didn't -- that helped me not hold back, where I maybe should have watched my tongue a little bit more, like I don't know people on my own show stressed -- is the long elevator rides that I would have at CNN, the way that I was treated over at CNN. I was treated by management at CNN very well and by a select few at CNN, like Anderson Cooper, very, very well. Others, I was literally a cancer. And elevator -- nobody would talk to me on the elevator. Nobody would look at me. In fact, all talking would stop when I would walk into the elevator. I mean, really bad, baby, nursery school stuff.

And so you just kind of walk -- I walked out of there going, "You know what, that's the way you're going to be, screw you."

And I hope that Megyn doesn't walk out of that -- for any bad things she may have experienced -- and I think the way she was gracious and the fact that they let her on last night shows that hopefully she doesn't have that attitude.

JEFFY: Yeah, that's why she's a sellout and a traitor. Good luck!

(chuckling)

GLENN: We got to stop, or we're not going to have anybody, except our own little teams. Our own little teams, and nobody will be listening to each other.

PAT: I hope our listeners aren't treating her that way.

JEFFY: No, I hope so too.

GLENN: No, I don't think they are. I don't think they are.

PAT: That's ridiculous.

GLENN: All right. Now, this, looking out your windows, you have your crooked, busted blinds. Are they blocking your view at all?

Let blinds.com help you start the new year off right. Blinds.com helped Tania and I completely transform our house. They gave us some of the best customer service we have ever experienced. There are two companies that I put into the highest level of customer service I have ever experienced. Number one, Apple. I don't know if it's still this way. I would assume that it was. But I -- I was all IBM. I didn't like Apple.

And I was all IBM. And would always use Windows and everything else until I couldn't get customer service. And I actually had an Apple product that I would never use. And I called their service, and I said, "Look, I've been trying to get service." And the guy said, "Look, I don't know anything about these. You know, I'm not authorized to tell you. And I might even get in trouble for telling you this. I shouldn't because we're in Apple. But I understand your frustration. Here, try this, this, and this."

He got my system to work. I hung up the phone, and I said, "Apple from here on out because of their customer service."

The other one that is customer service like that is blinds.com.

You will never witness customer service done right better, I think, than blinds.com. It's absolutely unbelievable. And the reason why they're so good is because they are the pioneer in doing this stuff online. So they had to get good at talking to people and talking with people and helping them say, "No, no, no, I want to make sure that you know what this looks like, so we're going to send you a sample, and it's not a hassle. I want to make sure you understand how easy it is for you to install, or you can grab us on the phone and we can help you, while you have the screwdriver in your hand, or we can help you line somebody up in your area that can install them." Whatever it is that you need to do, these guys will jump through hoops. It's why they are the biggest seller of blinds, shades, shutters, drapes online, anywhere on the planet. Number one is blinds.com. And now through January 31st, you'll get 20 percent off everything at blinds.com if you use the promo code Beck. 20 percent off of everything, site-wide at blinds.com. You just use the promo code Beck. Cellular shades. Roller shades. Blinds. Faux wood blinds. Shutters. Drapes. Whatever you need. Blinds, promo code Beck. Rules and predictions do apply.

[break]

GLENN: I have the names. Included a lot of people. Eric Bolling, .5 percent. Sean Hannity moved back to 9:00, 5 percent. Chris Wallace, 1 percent. Shannon Bream, 6.4.

PAT: She's actually pretty good.

GLENN: Greg Gutfeld, yeah, 3.8. Tucker Carlson, he's already at 7:00, 12.4.

Jake Tapper, 3.2. Brit Hume, 2.6. Kimberly Guilfoyle, 6.2. Bret Baier, 1.1. Shep Smith, .4. Janet Piro (phonetic) is five and a half. And Dana Loesch is at 32.6 percent.

JEFFY: Yeah.

GLENN: I would tell you, I would hate that, as Dana's coworker -- I would hate that. But if there's anyone who could sit in that seat and not be pushed around by anybody, she could do it. She could do it.

PAT: Yeah, she could pull that off.

GLENN: She could do it. You know, I've been saying for a long time, she's our Megyn Kelly on TheBlaze. She's great.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: And with the resources at Fox, she would be unstoppable.

PAT: There's another poll on Mediaite that has Laura Ingraham at 24 percent, followed by another Blaze person, Tomi Lahren at 17 percent.

GLENN: Really? Tomi would be --

PAT: So kind of interesting.

GLENN: If you're going to retool and go for youth --

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: You know, because she is huge.

PAT: Somebody who has huge social media presence.

GLENN: Social media is huge.

PAT: Gigantic.

GLENN: She would be a game-changer for Fox in more than one way. And, again, largest shareholder -- I don't involve myself in TheBlaze at all. I don't -- I have self-imposed lines around that for me.

But I am the largest shareholder. I would hate to lose either of them, but what a great opportunity for both of them. I wouldn't stand in their way. They're tremendous.

PAT: They have some really interesting candidates here, in this other poll: Katrina Pierson. Would that surprise you? If they brought in a Trump insider?

JEFFY: No. That's a good call.

PAT: And Dana Perino is the other pretty good option, I think there, that they've listed here, along with a lot of people on CNN that they'll never hire at Fox. Pretty interesting.

GLENN: Like who?

PAT: Like Don Lemon.

GLENN: Oh.

PAT: No way.

GLENN: Not only would they not hire him, he wouldn't take the job at Fox.

PAT: No, I don't think he would. I don't think so.

GLENN: Back in just a second.

[break]

GLENN: Hello, America. Welcome to the program. Let me go to Kevin on line one in West Virginia. Hello, Kevin.

CALLER: Hey, Glenn.

GLENN: How are you?

CALLER: I'm doing all right. I found out last night about Megyn Kelly leaving Fox. I think I can sum up why people have a problem with Megyn Kelly leaving Fox. It doesn't have anything to do with having a loyalty pledge to Fox. It has to do with the fact that outside of Fox News, the other networks, they've been lying to Americans. They have been lying about Americans for years. And she just joined another one of those networks.

Had she joined, let's say TheBlaze or Breitbart or some other conservative network, I don't think anyone would have a problem with her. But I think a lot of people see -- myself included, that Megyn Kelly is either becoming more liberal or she was a liberal the entire time and is now sort of just joining the people that she thinks more along the lines with.

GLENN: So, Kevin, let me ask you a couple of questions here.

CALLER: Sure.

GLENN: That assumes a couple of things that Fox, TheBlaze -- I'll include TheBlaze -- me, Breitbart, have never had an agenda or ever skewed a story or ever, you know, lied to people, knowingly or unknowingly lied to people. That there is no agenda. That our side is completely pure, A. Do you believe that?

And, B, that Megyn Kelly going over there would be an influence on them in a positive way. That there is only our side and their side, and those two should never meet.

CALLER: Well, if NBC was suddenly like, "Hey, we're not going to demean conservatives anymore. In fact, we're going to hire a more conservative host and give her a prime time spot," I think that would be amazing. But I wasn't born yesterday, so I don't think that's what they're doing.

GLENN: Well, hang on just a second. Hang on just a second. Did you have a problem with Greta van Susteren going over to MSNBC? Not NBC, MSNBC.

CALLER: I will fully admit, I do not not much about Greta van Susteren. So I would be -- it would be ignorant of me to start commenting on something I don't know anything about. So I'll defer to you on that.

GLENN: Okay. She is more liberal. I think she is more liberal in her life. But I don't think she's a crazy liberal. But she is more liberal. But I don't think she changed from a liberal Greta on CNN to a conservative Greta on Fox. I think she was consistent.

So I just -- I worry about these lines being drawn, where we're in camps. And if you go to the other side and even talk to them, you're in trouble. And I'm getting heat for this now. You know, I am intentionally going over to the other side and saying, "I'm not going to change my principles. I have not changed my position on policies, but I have changed my approach." And I refuse to put people into camps, or we're really going to put people in camps some day.

I want to have conversations, and I will have a conversation with anyone until they betray me. If they say one thing to my face and then do another, then I'm done with them. But I've worked with the New York Times. I went, and I met with them. And they -- you know, what you said that NBC wasn't doing, the New York Times did. And I've seen movement in this direction, where the New York Times said, "We cannot survive as a newspaper for just half the country. And we know we have this reputation. We don't believe that reputation. But we know that reputation is real, and we want to do everything we can to fix that reputation. Can somebody help us? How can we fix that?"

That's a good step. I'm willing to help anybody who says that. "How can I change the perception? And if I'm really doing something that I shouldn't be doing, can you help point that out to me?" Because they don't see it. They honestly don't see it, just like I think we don't see things. We're doing much of the same thing that Obama supporters did, and we don't see it.

CALLER: Glenn, I can understand that perspective. I actually voted for Ted Cruz as a protest vote in both the primary and the general election.

GLENN: Wow.

CALLER: Because I couldn't compromise my principles to vote for somebody who I felt did not deserve the office, which was, of course, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. But -- so I'm not coming at this with like, "Oh, she --

GLENN: Yeah, yeah, I get it.

CALLER: Some sort of lockstep, you know, brainwashed, oh, well, she must be in lockstep with the god/emperor Donald Trump or anything like that.

But I've grown up watching the media -- everyone except Fox because Fox is the only one around -- the only conservative network around for a while -- just lie about -- and to the American people, especially when I was younger about the Iraq War. Basically doing everything they could to help us lose that war.

GLENN: I agree.

CALLER: And considering I'm in the Armed Services, I take that pretty personally.

GLENN: I agree.

CALLER: And, like, it's not that she went to work for another network, it's the fact that she went to work for another network who has a decades' long history of being the most disgusting liars you could possibly imagine. I mean, it's like -- it goes in order. Number one, liars. Liberals. Number two, mainstream media.

GLENN: Let me -- let me -- let me -- well, that's a hasty generalization. I would urge you to define liberals as progressives. I know a lot of liberals who are really good people who I strongly disagree with on policy, but I don't believe are liars. Those who are self-pronounced progressives and especially those like Hillary Clinton who say, "I'm an early 20th century American progressive," that indicates to me they know exactly what that game is, and I will put those people into the category of liars. But I don't want to put that as a hasty generalization because I think a lot of people don't -- they don't know.

CALLER: I don't think it's a hasty generalization of Megyn Kelly though.

GLENN: That she's a liar?

CALLER: For one reason -- this is why I would think less of Megyn Kelly doing this than somebody else who is not as veteran or has been in media as long as she has, because she has been on the fighting side against a lot of liberal nonsense and mistruths. And so it's not like she's been insulated from the fact that the mainstream media outside of...

GLENN: So what happens -- what happens -- well, has George Will going over to ABC, is he less of a conservative because he's not at Fox and he's at ABC?

CALLER: I have to admit, again, I don't know who George Will is, so I couldn't comment on that.

GLENN: George Will is probably one of the biggest conservative minds -- do you know who Charles Krauthammer is?

CALLER: Yeah, he's the disabled gentleman on Fox, right?

GLENN: Yes.

PAT: Everybody knows K Ham. Everybody knows K Ham.

GLENN: Yeah. So K Ham is in the same category as George Will. George hasn't changed. We haven't seen what Megyn Kelly -- if Megyn Kelly goes over and she starts doing the same stuff and changes who she is and her approach, well, then you're exactly right. But I went from -- I went from -- I went from CNN -- I went from talk radio to CNN. And I said all the same things that I'm saying over -- now, over at CNN. And I said the same things when I went from CNN to Fox. Was I traitor? Because there were those who said, "Glenn Beck sold out going to CNN."

CALLER: No. I don't think it's hypocritical for me to have that opinion. Because at the time, at least for most people, anyway, most people didn't realize the media was as biased as it was.

I don't think somebody like you could get a job at CNN now. I don't think somebody half as conservative as you could get a job at CNN now.

But with Megyn Kelly going to the other networks as opposed to George Will going to, what was it? ABC. The reason why I think she might be becoming more liberal or revealing a bit more of her liberal ideas is because during the whole transgender bathroom issue, she was really sort of taking the side of, "Hey, it's perfectly okay to let non-men, pretending to be women into bathrooms, even if that means letting grown men into bathrooms with little girls." And seemingly showing that she probably holds legitimacy to the idea that you can be born with an XY chromosome, but if you decide that, well, actually I'm a woman, that that is a perfectly rational belief to hold. And that does not strike me as a conservative thing because that doesn't strike me as a factual or rational belief to hold.

GLENN: That is fascinating.

Okay. Okay. I agree with you 100 percent on that. However, does holding that position make you a liberal or just wrong on that issue? And if you are wrong -- depending on which point of view you have, if you're wrong or right on that issue, does that make you a traitor or just make you wrong on that issue?

CALLER: Well, like I said, Glenn, I don't think Megyn Kelly is a traitor. I'm not some sort of weird, you know, loyalty. We all have to be in lockstep. That kind of thing. But I do think if you hold that opinion, well, you are probably an idiot if you hold that kind of opinion. And I haven't met many conservatives who hold that opinion.

GLENN: Right.

CALLER: So we're going to assume that if she holds that opinion, she's probably a liberal. And I don't think that's too far of a stretch.

GLENN: Okay. So let me ask you this. Let me ask you this. Let me use two people because we both have our own networks and we're not going anywhere. Let's use Mark Levin --

CALLER: I wish I had my own network.

GLENN: Yeah. So let's use me and Mark Levin. We have our own thing. So I don't know what it would take to get us to go on to network television.

If NBC -- let's say that NBC is doing what I think they might be doing at MSNBC -- and I don't think -- it would be a crazy step down for Megyn Kelly to go to daytime on MSNBC. But let's just say that MSNBC has this new epiphany and this new vision, and they say, "You know what, we're getting slaughtered by doing what we're doing now." It's Crazytown to most of America. So we are in the business of making money, and we need to put something on that appeals to more than four people. So we want to add conservatives.

Now, I don't think this would work. But we want to put Greta van Susteren on and we want to put -- we want to put Megyn Kelly on, and we want Mark Levin to be right before Rachel Maddow. Would those people -- it wouldn't work. It would be a train wreck. But would those people be a traitor, or would that be a good thing?

CALLER: Well, it would be a good thing. But this is a -- this is a fantasy world hypothetical here.

GLENN: I don't think it is. I don't think it is. I don't think it is.

If NBC just hired Greta van Susteren --

PAT: Which they did apparently.

GLENN: Which they did. And they just hired Megyn Kelly, there is something in the air. Now, it's not -- it's not -- I don't think it is -- it's from the top-down. It's not from the bottom-up, in these institutions. I think the very top levels are starting to say, "This isn't working, and this is really going to hurt us in the long-run. We are going into camps. And it's only going to get smaller and smaller and smaller because the voices are louder and louder and louder on, you're a traitor. We can't be a part of that." And I think the top of these organizations are starting to understand that and are starting to say, "We can't do that anymore." So I don't think it is a fantasy.

CALLER: Well, I guess I'll have to give it some time because something like this hasn't happened in the media before. I need time to see it actually happen before I have I think as much like hope and faith as you do. I mean, I guess it's better to be, you know, positive and hope that the networks are becoming a little bit more unhinged -- becoming less unhinged.

GLENN: No, I think they're -- hang on just a second.

CALLER: I hope it's that, but I'm too cynical to believe it.

GLENN: Yeah. And I want you to know that I don't think -- I have just as much skepticism on them as they may have on me. Let's put it that way.

But I'm choosing to believe that there is -- only because I've had the discussions. I've had a discussion with a guy who came down for the full day and wanted to spend the full day with me from one of -- I mean, an organization that is -- oh, man -- more credible than this. But, I mean, like Mother Jones, almost. It's a print -- it's a print organization.

And the guy called several times and said, "Hey, I want to come down." And we said, "No." And then after a few phone calls, we said, "Okay." We sat down, and he said, "Look, I don't agree with anything you say. Nothing you say. But here's what I do see: We're all going to be out of business, we're all going to be destroyed, and we might all start building camps for each other if we don't stop this. And I want to know: Do you have some sort of insight on business, on how to make this work, because what you're doing right now is crazy, but maybe you have some insight that nobody else has."

And I said, "No. I just happen to believe that one thing that you just said, we're going to kill each other if we don't stop it. And that's more important than money or success to me." We had -- pardon me.

CALLER: Could I say something about that? About reaching out to people outside your camp.

GLENN: Yeah. Hold on just a second. I got to do a commercial. Then we'll come back and we'll get your comment.

Now, this. Resolutions are good, but action is much, much better. Goldline, the only company I trust and recommend. And here's the way I can tell you I put my money where my mouth is. I have some platinum I got from Goldline because right now platinum is less expensive than gold. That's how crazy this market is right now, where nothing makes sense. Platinum is less expensive than gold. Historically, that's -- that doesn't happen. What did I get my grandchildren? Oh, they loved it. Teething platinum. I got them a couple of coins to have their parents put in a safe-deposit box and save for them.

Gold, silver, platinum, I don't believe in the US currency for a long-term investment. I don't. But I certainly am not taking all of my money out of currency and putting it into gold. 10 percent of your 401(k) or your IRA is smart. Call them and do your own homework. 866GOLDLINE. 1866GOLDLINE or goldline.com.

[break]

GLENN: Cary, we have one minute. Can you make your point here? Go ahead. Cary, are you there?

PAT: It's Kevin.

GLENN: Oh, Kevin. Are you there? Go ahead.

Oh, jeez, did we lose, Kevin?

PAT: Are you there, Kevin? Kevin.

GLENN: Kevin, are you there? Line one.

PAT: Did we lose him? We lost him. So young too.

GLENN: Oh, shoot. I'm sorry.

PAT: You know, part of it is -- the problem with his premise was that it presumes Fox is pure conservatism. Fox is not pure conservatism. Fox is pure Republican Partyism. I mean, I wasn't even on the air there like you were, and I saw how not necessarily purely conservative Fox was. Fox is not the conservative outlet people believe it to be. I mean, look who they supported the whole campaign. Not a conservative.

Featured Image: Megyn Kelly (Getty Images)

Why do Americans feel so empty?

Mario Tama / Staff | Getty Images

Anxiety, anger, and chronic dissatisfaction signal a country searching for meaning. Without truth and purpose, politics becomes a dangerous substitute for identity.

We have built a world overflowing with noise, convenience, and endless choice, yet something essential has slipped out of reach. You can sense it in the restless mood of the country, the anxiety among young people who cannot explain why they feel empty, in the angry confusion that dominates our politics.

We have more wealth than any nation in history, but the heart of the culture feels strangely malnourished. Before we can debate debt or elections, we must confront the reality that we created a world of things, but not a world of purpose.

You cannot survive a crisis you refuse to name, and you cannot rebuild a world whose foundations you no longer understand.

What we are living through is not just economic or political dysfunction. It is the vacuum that appears when a civilization mistakes abundance for meaning.

Modern life is stuffed with everything except what the human soul actually needs. We built systems to make life faster, easier, and more efficient — and then wondered why those systems cannot teach our children who they are, why they matter, or what is worth living for.

We tell the next generation to chase success, influence, and wealth, turning childhood into branding. We ask kids what they want to do, not who they want to be. We build a world wired for dopamine rather than dignity, and then we wonder why so many people feel unmoored.

When everything is curated, optimized, and delivered at the push of a button, the question “what is my life for?” gets lost in the static.

The crisis beneath the headlines

It is not just the young who feel this crisis. Every part of our society is straining under the weight of meaninglessness.

Look at the debt cycle — the mathematical fate no civilization has ever escaped once it crosses a threshold that we seem to have already blown by. While ordinary families feel the pressure, our leaders respond with distraction, with denial, or by rewriting the very history that could have warned us.

You cannot survive a crisis you refuse to name, and you cannot rebuild a world whose foundations you no longer understand.

We have entered a cultural moment where the noise is so loud that it drowns out the simplest truths. We are living in a country that no longer knows how to hear itself think.

So people go searching. Some drift toward the false promise of socialism, some toward the empty thrill of rebellion. Some simply check out. When a culture forgets what gives life meaning, it becomes vulnerable to every ideology that offers a quick answer.

The quiet return of meaning

And yet, quietly, something else is happening. Beneath the frustration and cynicism, many Americans are recognizing that meaning does not come from what we own, but from what we honor. It does not rise from success, but from virtue. It does not emerge from noise, but from the small, sacred things that modern life has pushed to the margins — the home, the table, the duty you fulfill, the person you help when no one is watching.

The danger is assuming that this rediscovery happens on its own. It does not.

Reorientation requires intention. It requires rebuilding the habits and virtues that once held us together. It requires telling the truth about our history instead of rewriting it to fit today’s narratives. And it requires acknowledging what has been erased: that meaning is inseparable from God’s presence in a nation’s life.

Harold M. Lambert / Contributor | Getty Images

Where renewal begins

We have built a world without stillness, and then we wondered why no one can hear the questions that matter. Those questions remain, whether we acknowledge them or not. They do not disappear just because we drown them in entertainment or noise. They wait for us, and the longer we ignore them, the more disoriented we become.

Meaning is still available. It is found in rebuilding the smallest, most human spaces — the places that cannot be digitized, globalized, or automated. The home. The family. The community.

These are the daily virtues that do not trend on social media, but that hold a civilization upright. If we want to repair this country, we begin there, exactly where every durable civilization has always begun: one virtue at a time, one tradition at a time, one generation at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

A break in trust: A NEW Watergate is brewing in plain sight

Gary Hershorn / Contributor | Getty Images

When institutions betray the public’s trust, the country splits, and the spiral is hard to stop.

Something drastic is happening in American life. Headlines that should leave us stunned barely register anymore. Stories that once would have united the country instead dissolve into silence or shrugs.

It is not apathy exactly. It is something deeper — a growing belief that the people in charge either cannot or will not fix what is broken.

When people feel ignored or betrayed, they will align with anyone who appears willing to fight on their behalf.

I call this response the Bubba effect. It describes what happens when institutions lose so much public trust that “Bubba,” the average American minding his own business, finally throws his hands up and says, “Fine. I will handle it myself.” Not because he wants to, but because the system that was supposed to protect him now feels indifferent, corrupt, or openly hostile.

The Bubba effect is not a political movement. It is a survival instinct.

What triggers the Bubba effect

We are watching the triggers unfold in real time. When members of Congress publicly encourage active duty troops to disregard orders from the commander in chief, that is not a political squabble. When a federal judge quietly rewrites the rules so one branch of government can secretly surveil another, that is not normal. That is how republics fall. Yet these stories glided across the news cycle without urgency, without consequence, without explanation.

When the American people see the leadership class shrug, they conclude — correctly — that no one is steering the ship.

This is how the Bubba effect spreads. It is not just individuals resisting authority. It is sheriffs refusing to enforce new policies, school boards ignoring state mandates, entire communities saying, “We do not believe you anymore.” It becomes institutional, cultural, national.

A country cracking from the inside

This effect can be seen in Dearborn, Michigan. In the rise of fringe voices like Nick Fuentes. In the Epstein scandal, where powerful people could not seem to locate a single accountable adult. These stories are different in content but identical in message: The system protects itself, not you.

When people feel ignored or betrayed, they will align with anyone who appears willing to fight on their behalf. That does not mean they suddenly agree with everything that person says. It means they feel abandoned by the institutions that were supposed to be trustworthy.

The Bubba effect is what fills that vacuum.

The dangers of a faithless system

A republic cannot survive without credibility. Congress cannot oversee intelligence agencies if it refuses to discipline its own members. The military cannot remain apolitical if its chain of command becomes optional. The judiciary cannot defend the Constitution while inventing loopholes that erase the separation of powers.

History shows that once a nation militarizes politics, normalizes constitutional shortcuts, or allows government agencies to operate without scrutiny, it does not return to equilibrium peacefully. Something will give.

The question is what — and when.

The responsibility now belongs to us

In a healthy country, this is where the media steps in. This is where universities, pastors, journalists, and cultural leaders pause the outrage machine and explain what is at stake. But today, too many see themselves not as guardians of the republic, but of ideology. Their first loyalty is to narrative, not truth.

The founders never trusted the press more than the public. They trusted citizens who understood their rights, lived their responsibilities, and demanded accountability. That is the antidote to the Bubba effect — not rage, but citizenship.

How to respond without breaking ourselves

Do not riot. Do not withdraw. Do not cheer on destruction just because you dislike the target. That is how nations lose themselves. Instead, demand transparency. Call your representatives. Insist on consequences. Refuse to normalize constitutional violations simply because “everyone does it.” If you expect nothing, you will get nothing.

Do not hand your voice to the loudest warrior simply because he is swinging a bat at the establishment. You do not beat corruption by joining a different version of it. You beat it by modeling the country you want to preserve: principled, accountable, rooted in truth.

Adam Gray / Stringer | Getty Images

Every republic reaches a moment when historians will later say, “That was the warning.” We are living in ours. But warnings are gifts if they are recognized. Institutions bend. People fail. The Constitution can recover — if enough Americans still know and cherish it.

It does not take a majority. Twenty percent of the country — awake, educated, and courageous — can reset the system. It has happened before. It can happen again.

Wake up. Stand up. Demand integrity — from leaders, from institutions, and from yourself. Because the Bubba effect will not end until Americans reclaim the duty that has always belonged to them: preserving the republic for the next generation.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Warning: Stop letting TikTok activists think for you

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Bad-faith attacks on Israel and AIPAC warp every debate. Real answers emerge only when people set aside scripts and ask what serves America’s long-term interests.

The search for truth has always required something very much in short supply these days: honesty. Not performative questions, not scripted outrage, not whatever happens to be trending on TikTok, but real curiosity.

Some issues, often focused on foreign aid, AIPAC, or Israel, have become hotbeds of debate and disagreement. Before we jump into those debates, however, we must return to a simpler, more important issue: honest questioning. Without it, nothing in these debates matters.

Ask questions because you want the truth, not because you want a target.

The phrase “just asking questions” has re-entered the zeitgeist, and that’s fine. We should always question power. But too many of those questions feel preloaded with someone else’s answer. If the goal is truth, then the questions should come from a sincere desire to understand, not from a hunt for a villain.

Honest desire for truth is the only foundation that can support a real conversation about these issues.

Truth-seeking is real work

Right now, plenty of people are not seeking the truth at all. They are repeating something they heard from a politician on cable news or from a stranger on TikTok who has never opened a history book. That is not a search for answers. That is simply outsourcing your own thought.

If you want the truth, you need to work for it. You cannot treat the world like a Marvel movie where the good guy appears in a cape and the villain hisses on command. Real life does not give you a neat script with the moral wrapped up in two hours.

But that is how people are approaching politics now. They want the oppressed and the oppressor, the heroic underdog and the cartoon villain. They embrace this fantastical framing because it is easier than wrestling with reality.

This framing took root in the 1960s when the left rebuilt its worldview around colonizers and the colonized. Overnight, Zionism was recast as imperialism. Suddenly, every conflict had to fit the same script. Today’s young activists are just recycling the same narrative with updated graphics. Everything becomes a morality play. No nuance, no context, just the comforting clarity of heroes and villains.

Bad-faith questions

This same mindset is fueling the sudden obsession with Israel, and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in particular. You hear it from members of Congress and activists alike: AIPAC pulls the strings, AIPAC controls the government, AIPAC should register as a foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. The questions are dramatic, but are they being asked in good faith?

FARA is clear. The standard is whether an individual or group acts under the direction or control of a foreign government. AIPAC simply does not qualify.

Here is a detail conveniently left out of these arguments: Dozens of domestic organizations — Armenian, Cuban, Irish, Turkish — lobby Congress on behalf of other countries. None of them registers under FARA because — like AIPAC — they are independent, domestic organizations.

If someone has a sincere problem with the structure of foreign lobbying, fair enough. Let us have that conversation. But singling out AIPAC alone is not a search for truth. It is bias dressed up as bravery.

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

If someone wants to question foreign aid to Israel, fine. Let’s have that debate. But let’s ask the right questions. The issue is not the size of the package but whether the aid advances our interests. What does the United States gain? Does the investment strengthen our position in the region? How does it compare to what we give other nations? And do we examine those countries with the same intensity?

The real target

These questions reflect good-faith scrutiny. But narrowing the entire argument to one country or one dollar amount misses the larger problem. If someone objects to the way America handles foreign aid, the target is not Israel. The target is the system itself — an entrenched bureaucracy, poor transparency, and decades-old commitments that have never been re-examined. Those problems run through programs around the world.

If you want answers, you need to broaden the lens. You have to be willing to put aside the movie script and confront reality. You have to hold yourself to a simple rule: Ask questions because you want the truth, not because you want a target.

That is the only way this country ever gets clarity on foreign aid, influence, alliances, and our place in the world. Questioning is not just allowed. It is essential. But only if it is honest.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

A nation unravels when its shared culture is the first thing to go

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Texas now hosts Quran-first academies, Sharia-compliant housing schemes, and rapidly multiplying mosques — all part of a movement building a self-contained society apart from the country around it.

It is time to talk honestly about what is happening inside America’s rapidly growing Muslim communities. In city after city, large pockets of newcomers are choosing to build insulated enclaves rather than enter the broader American culture.

That trend is accelerating, and the longer we ignore it, the harder it becomes to address.

As Texas goes, so goes America. And as America goes, so goes the free world.

America has always welcomed people of every faith and people from every corner of the world, but the deal has never changed: You come here and you join the American family. You are free to honor your traditions, keep your faith, but you must embrace the Constitution as the supreme law of the land. You melt into the shared culture that allows all of us to live side by side.

Across the country, this bargain is being rejected by Islamist communities that insist on building a parallel society with its own rules, its own boundaries, and its own vision for how life should be lived.

Texas illustrates the trend. The state now has roughly 330 mosques. At least 48 of them were built in just the last 24 months. The Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex alone has around 200 Islamic centers. Houston has another hundred or so. Many of these communities have no interest in blending into American life.

This is not the same as past waves of immigration. Irish, Italian, Korean, Mexican, and every other group arrived with pride in their heritage. Still, they also raised American flags and wanted their children to be part of the country’s future. They became doctors, small-business owners, teachers, and soldiers. They wanted to be Americans.

What we are watching now is not the melting pot. It is isolation by design.

Parallel societies do not end well

More than 300 fundamentalist Islamic schools now operate full-time across the country. Many use Quran-first curricula that require students to spend hours memorizing religious texts before they ever reach math or science. In Dallas, Brighter Horizons Academy enrolls more than 1,700 students and draws federal support while operating on a social model that keeps children culturally isolated.

Then there is the Epic City project in Collin and Hunt counties — 402 acres originally designated only for Muslim buyers, with Sharia-compliant financing and a mega-mosque at the center. After public outcry and state investigations, the developers renamed it “The Meadows,” but a new sign does not erase the original intent. It is not a neighborhood. It is a parallel society.

Americans should not hesitate to say that parallel societies are dangerous. Europe tried this experiment, and the results could not be clearer. In Germany, France, and the United Kingdom, entire neighborhoods now operate under their own cultural rules, some openly hostile to Western norms. When citizens speak up, they are branded bigots for asserting a basic right: the ability to live safely in their own communities.

A crisis of confidence

While this separation widens, another crisis is unfolding at home. A recent Gallup survey shows that about 40% of American women ages 18 to 39 would leave the country permanently if given the chance. Nearly half of a rising generation — daughters, sisters, soon-to-be mothers — no longer believe this nation is worth building a future in.

And who shapes the worldview of young boys? Their mothers. If a mother no longer believes America is home, why would her child grow up ready to defend it?

As Texas goes, so goes America. And as America goes, so goes the free world. If we lose confidence in our own national identity at the same time that we allow separatist enclaves to spread unchecked, the outcome is predictable. Europe is already showing us what comes next: cultural fracture, political radicalization, and the slow death of national unity.

Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

Stand up and tell the truth

America welcomes Muslims. America defends their right to worship freely. A Muslim who loves the Constitution, respects the rule of law, and wants to raise a family in peace is more than welcome in America.

But an Islamist movement that rejects assimilation, builds enclaves governed by its own religious framework, and treats American law as optional is not simply another participant in our melting pot. It is a direct challenge to it. If we refuse to call this problem out out of fear of being called names, we will bear the consequences.

Europe is already feeling those consequences — rising conflict and a political class too paralyzed to admit the obvious. When people feel their culture, safety, and freedoms slipping away, they will follow anyone who promises to defend them. History has shown that over and over again.

Stand up. Speak plainly. Be unafraid. You can practice any faith in this country, but the supremacy of the Constitution and the Judeo-Christian moral framework that shaped it is non-negotiable. It is what guarantees your freedom in the first place.

If you come here and honor that foundation, welcome. If you come here to undermine it, you do not belong here.

Wake up to what is unfolding before the consequences arrive. Because when a nation refuses to say what is true, the truth eventually forces its way in — and by then, it is always too late.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.