GLENNFebruary 27, 2017

Concessions of a Transgendered Wrestler

Texas high school wrestler Mack Beggs recently won the state championship --- the female state championship --- amid controversy that caused some competitors to forfeit rather than wrestle the junior from Trinity High School in Euless, Texas. Beggs, who is transitioning from a girl to a boy, has been taking regular doses of testosterone.

"Take the emotion and the politics out of the transgendered issue for a second, and we'll just talk about how ridiculous it is that a girl who is taking heavy amounts of testosterone --- for a girl, right? --- would be able to compete at all," Co-host Stu Burguiere said Monday on The Glenn Beck Program.

Many argue that the high levels of testosterone, which build strength and muscles, give Beggs an unfair advantage. Begging the question, if it's Beggs' choice to transition, shouldn't she make concessions during the interim to maintain a level playing field? Concessions like not wrestling until the transition is complete?

Enjoy the complimentary clip above or read the transcript below for details.

PAT: We've had this situation where there is a girl who is transitioning to a boy. And she's 17 years old. She's a wrestler. And so she wanted -- apparently, she wanted to wrestle in the boy's division this year, right?

JEFFY: Correct. Correct.

PAT: Because she's making that switch. So she's going from boy to girl.

STU: And the Texas rule is, you compete in the gender that you were born.

PAT: That's on your birth certificate.

STU: Yes.

PAT: Especially I guess as long as you have that genitalia, which she does. She's a girl.

STU: Yeah, I don't know -- if you've gone through the full transition, I don't know -- again, if you're talking about kids, this is a pretty new development. I don't know if they have a rule for that.

PAT: Yeah, I don't either.

STU: I think the rule is the gender you had when you were born.

JEFFY: Yes.

PAT: So that's the rule in Texas because it's hateful. How can you possibly ask somebody to compete in the gender category they were born into, how can you ask that?

STU: You can't, Pat. You can't.

PAT: You can't. Because what if you feel differently? Anyway, she does.

JEFFY: Yes.

PAT: But she was made to -- she was put in the girl's category for wrestling. So she just won the tournament last week.

JEFFY: Yeah, she won the championship.

PAT: She won the championship.

JEFFY: The -- one of the issues is, is that she is actually going through the transition and taking the prescribed medicine to make the change. And so it's working.

PAT: The testosterone.

STU: Right. And, by the way, this ends any argument of all time as to whether men or women are better athletes. Just -- because this whole thing of -- the old Billie Jean King thing back in the day. Let's be honest about it. You take testosterone, you become better and stronger at sports.

PAT: Right.

STU: Sorry.

PAT: Now, that is science. That is science.

JEFFY: That is science.

STU: So sorry. I guess we have to apologize for that.

PAT: Everybody knows it. Everybody knows it. You can -- I guess you can try to deny it and say that women are just as strong in every instance as men. It's just not the case.

STU: No, they're better at certain --

PAT: Yes. They're just not built the same way as we are. And that's a good thing. It was supposed to be that way. We're supposed to be different. And we are. And we are.

STU: Stunning. A stunning development that everyone knew at a level of 100 percent until very recently.

JEFFY: Right.

PAT: This is insane. And, by the way, if a man were to take testosterone in the -- in Major League Baseball or the NFL --

STU: I like how you're saying this as a crazy hypothetical.

PAT: I know.

STU: If in some circumstance somehow --

PAT: And they do.

STU: -- some at least decided to take performance enhancing drugs --

PAT: I don't remember who it was. But your testosterone as a man in the normal range is 400 to 800, maybe up to 1,000. And that's fairly normal. I can't remember who the baseball player was. It might have been A-Rod. He had a testosterone level -- and I shouldn't mention him because I don't remember who it was. But I remember their level was 4,000. So clearly they had been --

JEFFY: That's a man.

PAT: No man takes -- or has that much natural testosterone. So clearly, they had been taking testosterone, so they were better at what they were doing than they otherwise would have been. So it works on men as well as girls transitioning to men. So obviously, this girl is going to become stronger, she's going to be faster. She's going to be better able to wrestle than she was as a girl with no testosterone.

JEFFY: Right. And the argument also from the other parents that are suing the school board is that, hey, she is taking this medicine. That's making her into a boy. We don't want her wrestling.

PAT: And in Texas, you can take -- you can compete if you've been prescribed the testosterone by a doctor, and she was.

JEFFY: Correct. And there are several -- there are three or four other things on that list that the Wrestling Association says it's okay as long as it's prescribed and that would not be okay if it was not prescribed, for sure.

PAT: Wow.

STU: And the reason for that, by the way, quickly, steroids are like standard treatment for a lot of illnesses.

JEFFY: Yes.

PAT: Yes. Right.

STU: If you break out in a rash or if you have -- if you're sick in any number of ways.

PAT: Uh-huh.

STU: One of the first responses is to give you a shot of steroids because, you know, it works. It's pretty effective.

PAT: It reduces swelling, aids in healing. It just -- it calms down infection. I mean, it does a lot of different things. I've taken steroids quite a bit. Because I've been sick lately. And it helps. They help.

STU: A lot.

PAT: So it kind of makes sense that there are certain circumstances under which -- you know, because if you're taking anabolic steroids, that's one thing. But if you're taking steroids that a normal doctor would prescribe for an illness that's a different deal.

JEFFY: Which is pretty much what they were covering when they made the rules, before this.

PAT: Right. So, anyway, Stu heard this interview on the way in by Chris Cuomo. And is it the lawyer representing the other girls in the tournament?

STU: No, this is Ben Ferguson, who is a talk show host. He's a CNN contributor, so he's there to take the evil right-wing side of this argument. Chris Cuomo who purpose or it is I guess to be a journalist. I don't know that for a fact. But it seems like he wants to come off as evenhanded on the show is a straight-out activist on this show.

PAT: Yes.

STU: And the reason is because he's in the middle of his own personal issue with the transgendered argument, which is last week someone tweeted to him -- when talking about the transgendered issue, what do you tell a 12-year-old girl who doesn't want to see a man's unit in the locker room?

So a 12-year-old girl is in the locker room, someone changing next to them, takes down their pants and has a guy junk. Right? He's got guy junk.

What do you tell that 12-year-old girl? His response was, I wonder if she is the problem.

PAT: Good gosh.

STU: Or her overprotective and intolerant dad. Teach tolerance. That was his response.

PAT: That's unbelievable.

STU: Now, look, that's unbelievable, to put that on the 12-year-old girl.

PAT: Unbelievable response.

STU: A 12-year-old girl is not equipped to -- even if this were the most logical thing in the world, is not equipped to make that determination. She's going to be interested in what she's interested in at that age. That's going to be -- it's a moment -- it's an era of discovery, right. And so that is not something that you would necessarily want -- that's why they have separation.

Because honestly, with this standard, why bother with two different bathrooms? Why bother with two different locker rooms for any reason? Why bother? Why not just be tolerant of male genitalia all the time for 12-year-old girls? Why is it only when someone else outside of their decision-making process makes a decision they identify a different way. Right? Someone else has done that, that doesn't affect the 12-year-old girl in this scenario. She hasn't made any judgment, well, I identify that person as a female, therefore the junk that I'm looking at is not male. That's not her determination. It's someone else's determination. So that is -- it's an absurd argument on its face.

But he got so much heat for that tweet, blaming the 12-year-old girl and her intolerant dad of not being accepting of penises in the locker room, which is essentially what he said: You should be tolerant of the penis.

That was the word they used. He got so much heat for that. He's now in, I've locked myself in the corner, and I'm going to be defensive on this point no matter what. Which, it brings out the best in Chris Cuomo. Because he's now so desperate to prove that this wasn't a mistake, he'll say anything.

PAT: Yeah. Listen to this.

VOICE: What's your take on the tournament, my friend?

VOICE: Well, first off, I think this -- take the transgendered issue out of it for a second. If you are taking testosterone, which is a performance-enhancing drug in sports, you shouldn't be able to wrestle.

PAT: Correct. There you go.

VOICE: And this gave a completely unfair advantage to this participant. You can talk about that whether you are in your age-group or in your sex group that are associated with. If you're taking something that is performance enhancing, you're not a real champion. You cheated and you won.

Now, the state I think has some blame for this, by having it where they're even allowing these testosterones to be used if they're prescribed by a doctor. That's where I think the big fix probably needs to come.

STU: Stop for a second. Because this is -- so, first of all, this is his first response. Take the emotion and the politics out of the transgendered issue for a second. And we'll just talk about you how ridiculous it is that a girl who is taking heavy amounts of testosterone for a girl, right? Would be able to compete at all. So taking out the transgendered issue, it's still wrong. So he's already won the argument at this point, right?

JEFFY: Right. Right.

STU: But not with Chris Cuomo who can't possibly accept this.

CHRIS: If there was acceptance, we wouldn't have had this issue because this kid would be wrestling against boys.

PAT: Oh, good gosh.

STU: So here's his argument: So Chris, he falls back to --

PAT: If there were acceptance.

STU: I don't know what level we're going to fall back to on this. It's going to be hard to keep track of. But he falls back to, if there was -- if we taught acceptance, this wouldn't be an issue because she would be able to wrestle the boys like she wants to.

PAT: And in that eventuality, we wouldn't be talking about the story at all because she would have lost in the first round, and it would be over.

STU: Right. That's true.

PAT: It would be over.

STU: That's true. However -- however, we still would be talking about the issue. Why?

Because in a liberal state, let's say California, there would be a -- it would go the opposite way. You would have a boy who was transforming to be a girl and wanted to identify as a girl and then went into the girl's division and then destroyed all the girls. So the issue would still exist, it would just be in a liberal state and the opposite way. So he's completely wrong there to say the issue goes away if -- if we, quote, unquote, teach acceptance. The issue still exists, it's just on the opposite side.

VOICE: We know. And for those as you're learning about -- just so people know.

VOICE: Here's the thing.

VOICE: But hold on, Ben. Let's just clarify one thing: The science, you have to be careful about.

STU: This is argument two.

PAT: The science now.

VOICE: The amount of hormone that this kid is given is the minimum standard they can give to replicate the output of a boy.

STU: Okay. Stop. There's so much there.

JEFFY: Oh, my gosh.

PAT: Does he know the amount she's being given?

STU: First of all -- yes. So that was one of his big arguments in this. I assume he knows it because he quotes -- he kept saying, you have to look it up. You have to look it up. So, again, that's a bad assumption on my part.

PAT: Look it up, Jeffy. See how much testosterone --

STU: However, it's not the minimum amount that a girl would have, right? It's actually way more than a girl would have, which is what makes the transition happen.

PAT: Yes. Way more. It's the minimum amount for a boy.

STU: For a boy. Now, let's just say that that's true. So even if his argument is true, it's still cheating --

PAT: So even if his argument is true, it's still cheating.

STU: It still would be cheating as the girl. So his point is, well, then they should allow him -- her -- him to wrestle with the boys, right? Because he wants -- she identifies as a man. So we should think that she's a man. We should allow her to wrestle with the boys. Because she's not getting -- his point there is, he's not getting so much -- she's not getting so much more testosterone than the boy would normally have. So she's not a superhuman boy, she's just a boy, right? First of all, his wording is interesting there. The amount to replicate a boy.

If she's a boy, you do not need to replicate the boy.

If you're replicating something, you're replicating it because it's not actually happening. Therefore, your whole scientific argument is flawed. The thing that you're saying you want to happen isn't happening.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: She is not a boy. So if she was a boy, you would not need to replicate it.

PAT: Yeah, if you need to talk about science, what is she scientifically? She's a girl.

STU: She's a girl.

PAT: She's had no surgery. There's nothing been changed on her body. She's a girl. So if you want to talk science, she's a girl. And then -- so it's unfair for the girl to be getting testosterone, when the other girls aren't getting it.

STU: Right. Exactly. Now, his point seems to be, what he wants to happen is that she wrestles against the boys and then loses because she is getting only the appropriate level for a boy of testosterone.

Again, it's a ridiculous argument in and of itself. But if you're going -- even if you're going to entertain it, the point is, getting performance-enhancing drugs -- it's not to say that you let everyone come to the same level of testosterone. The point is, you don't get additional testosterone as to what you have naturally. That's the point of the rule. It's enhancing. Whether you think it's enhancing it only to equal, it's not the point. The point is, you don't enhance it to what you have naturally.

PAT: Uh-huh.

STU: She has very little naturally. And they're enhancing it to get a higher level, regardless of what level.

PAT: And all we're talking about here is -- the level of the other competitors is what we should be talking about, not the level of the boys.

STU: Yes. Right.

PAT: Because is it unfair for her to have beaten all these girls whose level of testosterone is ridiculous?

VOICE: Kids are going to be superhuman -- it's the opposite.

PAT: No, it's not the opposite.

VOICE: Scientifically, that is the outcome. If you look and do the research as I have, you'll see that.

STU: Oh, God.

PAT: What a condescending ass.

STU: Yes. Remember, this is a guy who is in full standing in the Douche Hall of Fame. And this is him showing off why he's there.

PAT: Exactly.

STU: And, by the way, on Pat and Stu today, a vote on Chris Cuomo as the Grand Nozzle after this interview. Because he deserves it from Harry Reid.

VOICE: If this state allowed this kid to wrestle against boys, which is what he wants, we wouldn't be talking about this case right now.

STU: Right. This case. You would be talking about a different case in a different state that went the opposite way. The issue would not go away at all based on that. You would just be arguing the opposite side of it.

PAT: True.

VOICE: But you also have to look at, there has to be a standard. And I think it's not insane or crazy for a state to say that you compete with the sex that's on your birth certificate. That's what I would refer to as logical. It is illogical to somehow imply that this kid is a victim because he decided to do something or change something and therefore you change the entire sport around it. That is the part that I think many people are sitting here and saying, "Hey, if you want to compete in a sport, period, then you cannot be taking performance-enhancing drugs and do it." But to say that we should change the entire way that sports is done because of one person and their decision to do something, that is unrealistic.

VOICE: Right.

But the premise is flawed. Because the logic requires --

STU: We got to come back. We're not going to have time to get it --

VOICE: I disagree. That's why we're having a discussion. That transgender doesn't count. But it does count, and that's why we're having this bigger debate about what you allow trans kids to have access to and what you don't.

PAT: He goes on to say that she identifies as a girl.

STU: Yeah, but we have to come back and play -- because that part is unbelievable as well.

PAT: Unbelievable.

STU: His scientific argument is that she identifies. Well, that's not science.

PAT: That's not science. Now you're talking feelings. You're not talking science.

STU: As you said, they're replicating it. She's identifying. You're laying it out -- subconsciously, you're saying the truth. You can't help yourself. You can't help yourself. You keep saying the truth.

PAT: I can identify as a gerbil, if I want to, but I'm not. I'm not one. And I won't fit into the little thing with the wheel that goes -- spins around and around. So...

STU: Right. And any other circumstance, this argument would be completely bizarre.

RADIO

The dark side of artificial intelligence: Amazon's 30,000 job cuts

Amazon, who famously promoted a high hourly rate to gain workers, is now set to eliminate 30 THOUSAND jobs in favor of artificial intelligence automation. This is a prime example of how artificial intelligence can be used in a negative way, and Glenn doesn't think American citizens will take too kindly to this...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I want to talk to you about the story that I saw today. Bill Gates says climate change will not lead to humanity's demise. Pardon me?

Wait. Hold on just a second. Let me go back into the records here, and see. Let's see. What has he said? 2015. Climate change is a terrible problem, absolutely needs to be solved. Deserves to be a huge priority. It is the poorer people in tropical zones, who will get hit by climate change, as well as some ecosystems nobody wants to see disappear. The threat of climate change is dire. He said that just two years ago. It will be the greatest challenge the world has ever faced.

We must take it on. We must reach net zero emissions by 2050, to avoid a climate disaster. 2021, to avoid climate disaster.

We need to eliminate emissions from the ways we create electricity, grow food, make things move around, blah, blah, blah. No one will be hurt more by climate change than the world's poorest people. It's already worse than most models predicted.

To prevent climate change scenarios, we need breakthroughs. In key areas. He's now put billions of dollars behind the climate change movement. Now he says, not so bad!

Not so bad! Not so bad!

What the hell just happened?

Okay. What just happened. On a completely unrelated note, let me give you another story today. Amazon, the first company to say, $30 an hour! You come on in, and work in our warehouses, is $30 an hour.

30 is an interesting number, because they just laid off 30,000 people. Why?

Because they're going AI. Okay?

It's all going to be automated. Everything. This is the first -- this -- warning. This is the first -- what do you call that aftershocks, when you get the rumbles before the big earthquake?

You know, it's like pre-shock. Just the quick, quiet, very low on the Richter scale rumble. And you're like, what was that? What was that?

That's an earthquake coming. Things starting to shift. Just a little bit. Not the big one yet. Just a little shift.

STU: Chooses to use the term birth pangs for this.

GLENN: Yeah, birth pangs. Birth pangs are the things you have -- you're just having that first birth pang. Thirty thousand people laid off.

Now, remember, gosh. Think of the money they're saving, because they were paying everybody $30 an hour. Because they were such a great company. They care about people. Until they could replace all the people.

Now, why am I bringing that story up. Next to the Bill Gates story about climate change.

What do those stories have -- what do they have in common at all?

Power! And I don't mean just political or economic power, absolutely. That goes without saying. I mean, energy. The world is starving for energy.

I've got a story for you next hour. And I'm going to show you exactly where you have to be, whether you're for climate change -- you know, we've got to go all green, or we've got to go all in, on server farms. One way or another, I will tell you what you have to do, and it is imperative that you do it, next hour.

But here's what snapped together today: We have been seeing this movement, and I know that the world is about to change, and our system doesn't work. The two parties don't work. It doesn't cover everything. We have been fighting over communism or fascism. Both of them are wrong! Okay. They don't work.

And they've been sold exactly the same way, over and over. Except, global warming. Global warming has been the one thing that has not been out and out Marxist, until it had to be.

And then you're like, okay. All right. We want people to -- we want people to die, because it will save the earth. So we're absolutely, you know, antigrowth.

Okay?

Pretty easy to see what side you are on. At least for me. Pretty easy to see what side you're on.

I am for growth. I am for technology.

I am for an end to this global warming nonsense. Except, I am also pro-earth.

I think we have -- we have a responsibility to make sure we do things that are right for the earth.

I am absolutely pro-pharmaceuticals. Until I'm not pro-pharmaceuticals. Because I think the pharmaceutical companies have gotten out of control.

I am absolutely for doing everything we can, with our farmers, to be able to have them grow and grow food to feed the world. Until we start screwing with the food so much.

It's not really even meat anymore. And we don't really know where it's from. So am I for big ag, or against big ag?

Because I like parts of it. I don't like parts. Am I for the pharmaceutical companies, or against the pharmaceutical companies? Because I like the pharmaceutical companies, until I don't like the pharmaceutical companies.

Am I -- am I for the planet, or against the planet?

I like AI. But I'm also terrified of AI. Am I for AI or against AI?

I am for jobs. I am for people. So how can you be for people if you are AI?

Do you see how none of this works? Do you see how you are -- you are literally. We are already dividing ourselves into. We're being pulled apart.

I don't know. I have another thing I will do next hour. After I tell you the other thing next hour. Hope to get to this other thing. Where you don't know what the truth is anymore.

We are pulling ourselves completely apart. Right?

You don't know what the truth is. You don't know what to believe anymore.

Did Erika kill her husband Charlie Kirk? Please! But there are a lot of people that don't know. They don't know the truth. Why? Why don't they know the truth? Because people who don't believe in anything, will fall for everything! And we don't know what we believe anymore. We going to elect Mamdani?

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. New York is going Marxist.

Maybe Islamist to some degree.

It's going that way. It's going to happen. So how is that going to work?

Hmm. I brought in a chalkboard. Because I was explaining this to Stu. And, Stu, I want you to help me with this.

Because as I was laying this out for you. It's because -- I want you to know. I divided this chalkboard into two categories. And they are not good or bad.

They just are. Okay? Because there are things that I like on both sides of the chalkboard. But I'm going to show you what you're going to be asked to choose from. Because these are how these two sides are going to end up in the end.

STU: Sort of like a great realignment?

GLENN: Yes. Yes. Okay.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: So on one side, we're going to have the global warming people. Well, I'm not for the global warming people. Because that's all degrowth. Right?

I'm not for that. I am for workers.
And I am kind of anti-AI. I don't want AI to take over everything and control everything.

STU: Right.

GLENN: Correct?

Right?

But at the same time, I am AI and tech driven.

I just announced something with AI, okay?

But I am for ethical AI. Global warming and degrowth?

No, I'm for drill, baby, drill.

But I am -- I am big business. But I'm not big business.

I believe in capitalism. I believe in ethical capitalism. But I don't mind big business. But I have a hard time with, I don't know. Some of these AI companies like Google and everybody else, that now seem to be in better with our government.

I don't want them in bed with our government.

STU: I was going to say, you mentioned Amazon, Amazon is a good example of this.

It's a company that is obviously, very much big business.

Also, seen as capitalism. So do you like that, do you not like that?

There are things that I like about Amazon. There's things I don't like about it.

GLENN: I don't like that. I don't like the fact that they're the government's server farms? I don't like that.

Big Pharma, there's lots of it I like. There's lots of it I don't like. I don't like control and digital IDs.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: I'm anti-Marxist. That drill, baby, drill side, that's anti-Marxist. But it also leans globalist. I'm against that.

But it is for abundance. Growth, growth. Growth.

Abundance. Right?

On the other side, and I'm showing you how these things will line up.

The other side is global warming and key growth. Because it's also going to be pro worker. Anti-AI, anti-capitalist, Marxists.

But it's going to deemphasize degrowth and Marxism. It will be for real food. It will be MAHA. It will be local. It will be free trade. But not really.

Fair trade? Maybe. Maybe.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: It will be --

STU: This classic free trade seems to align more with the other side.

GLENN: In the end, it will be a local farmers market. In the end, you will need to trade with one another, the way you want to trade. Okay? That's wait it will be sold. And it will be 15 minute cities. It will be 15-minute cities. Because the rest of the world is going to be AI, digital IDs, globalism, tracking everything, and this will be the anti-vat.

And so they will say, I will live in the 15-minute cities.

Remember, it will be growth and Marxism. But it will be packaged in a way, that we don't want to be that. We don't want to be that.

So I'll live in my 15-minute city. I don't need all of that technology. I don't need self-driving cars. I would rather know my neighbor. I would rather walk down the street, get my food, that I know I -- I know I get.

But I won't be able to do those things. But I don't want to do all those things with because I don't want to have the digital ID. Okay?

What you're going to get on one side, is in the end, going to be globalist and fascistic.

Global fascism on one side. The other side will be Marxist de-growth. These -- what I'm presenting to you, is pretty much especially on the Marxist de-growth side, the global warming side. That's going to be a utopia that will never survive. It will never survive. But that's the utopia that people are going to be offered. They are now going to be -- because global warming is now starting to be -- you know, a no-go zone.

It's going to be changed, and it's going to become pro-people, anti-tech, anti-big tech corporations.

It's going to become about anti-pharmaceutical companies. It will be about real food. It will be about health and MAHA. It's going to be about all the things that you probably go, I'm kind of for that stuff.

And the other side is going to be the other side of you that you're for. Well, I'm for capitalism. I'm for progress.

I'm for abundance. I'm for, you know, having energy.

This is the split, that is coming.

And I believe the Marxist global warming side is going to be extraordinarily appealing to a lot of people.

You may even have a -- right now, you'll hear this and go, I'm never going there.

Mark my words. It's going to be very difficult to see the difference of right and wrong.

Because everything is going to blur. On you.

Things that you think you're for, they're suddenly going to be for.

But are they actually for that? And that goes to both sides of this issue.

Because what's not on this chalkboard is the US Constitution.

This is the way the world will split. These are the choices, you're going to make.

Which way do you go?

There is a third way. And it's the US Constitution. That's not on the board. Because right now, that's not popular. No one is talking about it.

RADIO

Your electric bill is SKYROCKETING because of one MASSIVE change

Electric bills across the country are still going up, despite the prices of things like eggs and gas going down. Glenn explains how AI server farms, built by companies like Microsoft and Amazon, are likely to blame...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So can we talk about real issues?

Let me tell you about the coming blackout.

Right now, in the last few days, there is a group of lawmakers in the mid-Atlanta in the Maryland, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey. They're all sounding the alarm. And they're sounding the alarm. Because they believe, and I do too. That the worst power bill crisis in a generation is happening right now. Skyrocketing bills and strained grids.

How is it, this is happening?

We've drilled, baby, drilled. We've put new power plants online. Or old power plants we brought back online. They're saying, part of the problem is all this green new energy crap. Everybody is still saying, we have to have green energy. We have to have green energy. I just want you to hear this out in a second. But because I want to give you the reality of what's going on. Green energy is wonderful, I guess.

But it's absolutely a thing that will set us back hundred years plus. Okay? Green energy does not work for the America of 2000.

It certainly doesn't work today. Every single month, a new server farm is breaking ground somewhere in America. Once a month, that means 12 new server farms every year.

That will snowball. By the end of 2026, you will see them built and breaking ground maybe one a week. What we have so far, not building things small here. Each one of these data centers, which is feeding artificial intelligence, crypto, cloud computing.

They consume as much power as 50 homes all the time.

Told you at the beginning of the hour, Bill Gates has just come out and said, you know what,, you know, global warming is not as bad as you thought it was.

It's so laughable, because it's so transparent.

It's so evil.

It's not as bad as everybody thought it was.

We have to get off this global warming went. But we need power plants, I'll tell you that right now. Why? You know who Bill Gates' partner is? OpenAI. ChatGPT. Okay?

That's his partner. So we know why he's off this bandwagon. Because they're struggling, right now to find enough electricity, for what they're currently running.

Let alone the next generation of systems.

You have Google, Meta, Amazon, that are buying up land in every -- next to every major substation that they can find, because they know what's coming. But wait a minute. They're building it near substations. Wait. Wait.

Hold on. Are you taking the power from my home?

In many cases, yes!

Listen to this. This is from the international energy agency. This is something they just released. Global data center power will double by the end of 2026.

That is equivalent to adding another Japan to our energy demand.

Okay. Another Japan.

And that's just for computers and server farms. Adding Japan.

What are we building to be able to serve that? Not enough. Ireland has just begun restricting the new data centers. Now, here's what's going to happen. You're going to restrict them. And it's going to leave you in the past. Now, maybe you want to be left in the past. And that's what that chalkboard is about.

Maybe you want to be left in the past. But Ireland just said, no more server farms. Don't do it. Parts of the Netherlands. Singapore. Sweden. They are freezing construction now on all server farms. Because the grid can't handle the demand already. Tokyo's grid is so strained by the server farms that they have. Blackouts have already occurred in Tokyo during peak hours.

China, which is building a new coal fire plant. Every week, is rationing power to factories so they can keep the AI data hubs running.

So what happens when we shut down coal and install nuclear. And depend on sunshine and windmills. What happens?

Who's powering the cloud?

PJM. This is mid-Atlantic grid, PJM is one that runs it, one of the largest in the world. They say their grid in the mid-Atlantic is already at the breaking point. They have warned, quote, of critically tight capacity. Meaning, one bad to remember.

One bad heat wave. One bad cold spell. And you've got rolling blackouts.

Okay?

Why? Because the last administration retired reliable fossil fuel plants faster than we could replace them. We didn't replace them.

So we're already behind the eight ball. And now, the surge, and the search for power is on.

In Maryland alone. Energy production has dropped as consumption has surged. Why?

Because of the data centers. Virginia's data center corridor, which is, you know, the economic crown jewel of -- of Virginia. This giant data center corridor that happens in Virginia. It now consumes.

Now, today, you're still figuring out what AI does. Okay?

It now consumes one-fifth of Virginia's total energy output. One-fifth! Today!

Why is your electricity price going up?
Why have eggs gone down? They're back to over a dollar a dozen. Why has gas gone down. It's back to the price it was in 2018, 2019. Why is it that the prices have gone down? Yet your energy costs are skyrocketing?

ChatGPT. Amazon. AI. All the things -- Amazon just fired 30,000 people because they're going to replace them with electric robots and machines and AI. That takes power.

Imagine, you know, what happens to your price of housing, when you import 10 million people?

The price of housing goes through the roof. And nobody can afford a house. What happens to electricity, when the people aren't powered on food or have to live in a house, but just need electricity? When you have all that electricity demand for these AI systems and bots. Of course, the price is going to go through the roof.

Especially if we are at the same time that the -- the demand is going up. We're saying, limit the number of power plants. Let's go all are going to.

If you want green energy and you've known this. We've said this.

It's de-growth. But listen to me carefully. I'm not throwing you under the bus.

If you want green energy, then you have to recognize. And maybe you're fine with this. Probably are. No Bitcoin. No AI. And no modern digital economy. It doesn't exist.

If you want AI. And the server farms. And the EVs. And your self-driving car. Digital infrastructure.

You must start building power plants in your state, right now! The problem is, these two realities cannot co-exist. So we're going to see a split in the country. Okay?

The climate cult, as they're calling it, it's going to run head-long into artificial intelligence. And when that happens, lights go out, in your house. So what do you do? Let me give you two options.

If you live in a state, and you want to go net zero, you now have to demand, right now, that they top proving new server farms in your state, because that is in direct conflict with your green energy.

You cannot live in a state that is building new server farms or is supplying power to server farms across the border to another state. You must pass laws right now. And I'm not for this. But I'm just giving you the option if you're for green energy revolution. You must stop all server farms being built in your state.

Or they will bleed you try! And you must also pass a law saying, we are not selling our electricity, over state lines! For a server farm.

Got to do it. Got to do it now. You cannot run a trillion parameter AI model on fairy dust or solar power. Or wind power.

It doesn't happen.

Now, if you believe in innovation, if you believe in the free market, if you believe in progress. If you believe in AI.

You've got to call your state reps right now. And demand new stable, high output energy plants.

The president is saying, that all of these companies that are building these server farms, must be responsible for their own power.

They must build their own power plant.

You don't get anything from the grid!

But that's not happening.

So you need to go to your state rep and say, they cannot take the grid power.

They cannot take the power from the people. They have to create their own power. And I would say, and, in fact, if they want to do it, they must put some excess power into the grid, because they're the ones that will be able to build the nuclear power plant, not your state. They will! Gas, nuclear, hydro. Whatever it takes, you need to call your state and say, "We want power!" And we want the grids, and we want the server farms.

But if you are apathetic on this or if you're ignorant on this and you don't begin to act now, you are going to be -- you're going to be, you know, at the whims of whoever it is, that's running your state. California, we know which way you're going, but are you building server farms as well?

Because if you are, Utah, you should pass a law. We are not going to sell any more power to California because they will take your power, to fund their server farms, not the people. Their server farms. They will buy more power from you. Which, if they're buying it from you. Do you have enough for your server farms. And your people in your state.
Most likely, no! Unless you are doubling down on energy building, right now. This is the near-term problem.

Believe it or not, by the end of 2026, everybody will be very well aware of what energy is costing them. And what server farms are doing to the stability of our grid.

Unless people act right now. And, you know, it's one to things act at the federal level.

This has to be at your local level.

And, quite honestly, I want the energy in Texas. I am not -- I do not want to ship our energy someplace else for somebody else's server farm, if they're not pulling their own weight on electricity.

Because Texas is going to have server farms out the wazoo.

We are building the power plants. We're not building them fast enough.

But we are building tell me.

And until we know our population, which is growing exponentially. Our population can have the power they need to live, survive, and work!

And the power -- or, the server farms that we are building, they have their power as well.

There shouldn't be any -- there shouldn't be 1 kilowatt that is going across our border!

Especially to states who are green!
But this one is going to be up to you.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

How Big Food Companies Fed America a Diet of Lies | Jillian Michaels

Glenn Beck sits down with fitness icon Jillian Michaels to expose how modern culture has turned self-destruction into a virtue. What started as a call for kindness has become a “culture of death," where truth is labeled hate, and lies are celebrated as love. From the body positivity movement co-opted by Big Food, to the rise of victimhood as moral superiority, Beck and Michaels uncover how empathy has been weaponized to control people, dull responsibility, and destroy health — physically, emotionally, and spiritually.

Watch Glenn Beck's FULL Interview with Jillian Michaels HERE

RADIO

The REAL danger of Democrats' shutdown: Hungry children and chaos

The federal government is still under a shutdown and the responsibility falls directly on the Democratic Party. Glenn Beck explains why he believes the Democrats haven’t agreed to a continuing resolution yet and why it could soon get dangerous for average Americans as airports and the SNAP program remain unfunded…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So the federal government is -- has remained closed because they will not pass a continuing resolution, a clean CR as they call it. And the responsibility of that failure falls directly on one of the two major parties. And that party is the Democrat Party.

The political -- the political speak is echoing through the halls of Congress. Our military is now being funded by private dollars. Can you believe it?

This week, is the week air traffic controllers will stop receiving a paycheck. And so will be at the mercy of people who will be like, I'll work for free.

And worst of all, deep in America's neighborhoods, children are going to go to bed hungry. Now, I am not a fan of big, social programs. I think the welfare system that we have created in this country has done nothing for poverty. And all of the stats bare it out. Zero for poverty. In fact, it may have even gotten worse. But the party that purports to represent the weakest among us. The ones that are like, they want your children to starve in the middle of the street.

The ones who represent the weakest are the ones refusing to keep the lights on, or now to secure the food on the table for the poor and the vulnerable.

Literally, the poorest among us. The children they're saying, will starve to death. They are going to take the food out of their mouth. And it reveals who they really are. Okay? What matters to them.

Their inaction is truly a choice. And it's -- it's the condemning of the poor, that they say they're for through these government programs.

I say, that's not the way to do it. They say, it is.

But now, they've -- after they've enslaved people on these government programs, they're just yanking the carpet out. So here's what's actually happening: On October 1st, the federal government entered shutdown because Congress failed to pass a full year appropriations. Or a stopgap, CR, continuing resolution, to fund the essential programs.

The Republicans had been there the whole time. Saying, pass this. Pass this.

We can even do a two-week or four-week. Let's keep government functioning. But they won't do it. Now, among the programs at risk now, beginning in November 1st is the nation's primary food aid mechanism. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. You know, SNAP.

The one the Democrats said, they had to expand under Obama.

Now, according to the most recent data, SNAP is serving an average of 42 million people every single month.

That's 12 percent of all of the people that live here in the United States, in fiscal year 2024.

Okay?

12 percent.

And the US Department of Agriculture as has now said, okay. We don't have the contingency funds.

The ones we do have, can't legally be used to cover normal monthly SNAP benefits in the funding gap. The president has tried to do everything he can. But the court system just keeps shutting him down.

And I don't want to give the president more power, to be able to do whatever he wants. Okay?

Fund the government. Now, here's the implication. As early as next week, millions may no longer receive their benefits. Or they will face the delay and a reduction. We know, because we've gone through this over and over again. These are always partisan standoffs. But we're now witnessing where the Democrats are weaponizing hunger.

The SNAP program traces all of its roots back to the Democrats, the food stamp era of the 1960s and 1970s. By 2020, it was helping over 40 million people. Now, the previous shutdowns have delayed benefits. Okay?

But not endangered the monthly food assistance to tens of millions of people, directly.

Shutdowns are supposed to be a bureaucratic interruption. That's why I celebrate shutdowns.

Okay?

I don't want basic programs to be cut. But I do love the fact that we can look at the government and say, wow, a lot of you seem to be noncritical! Or nonessential employees.

But now we have a shutdown that threatens to pull the food out from American children!

I say this kind of with glee, because they've always said, "We want to harm children," and none of us want to harm children.

But the Democrats are actually going out, by choice. It is their choice, to pull funding they say is absolutely necessary to feed children in America. And they're okay with it!

This is the party of social compassion, remember. They have in recent years, accused Republicans of refusing to negotiate. Being unwilling to compromise on budgets.

Being unwilling to compromise on continuing resolutions. You know, on -- on just, you know, at least funding the basic floor, for the vulnerable!

And yet, the Democrats are now leading us into the longest shutdown in our history!

And they are knowingly using hungry children and babies to do it. And why are they doing it? Why are they doing it?

Let's be honest. Chuck Schumer is doing it, so he's not primaried by the left wing of his own party. That's what this is really all about. Okay? And this contradiction matters. When you accuse the other side of refusing to negotiate, yet, withhold life support for children. Your moral vacuum is a little stark and clear.

Now, because of the shutdown, USDA warns, 42 million have I seen may not receive SNAP benefits in November. In Texas alone, that means 3.4 million people who depend on SNAP are now being told the state is monitoring the situation. But the state of Texas may not be able to guarantee November benefits. And we're a state in good shape.

Imagine what's going to happen in California or in Illinois.

Virginia's governor has declared a state of emergency in the anticipation of the loss of federal food benefits. So what does this actually mean in human costs? Well, let's just take the Democrat's word for it.

We know families are already living on the margin. Children are relying on the kindness of the system. The system is not kind. We've told you forever, the system does not -- it cannot love you.

It doesn't care about you. The politicos in Washington, they don't actually care about you.

And we are seeing this now, with the Democrats!

This means, the food banks are going to be swamped. But food banks are already low.

Now, these are the ones who are bearing the burden of the political gains.

Further, now, listen to this. See who this might help. When food becomes scarce for families. What happens?

Stress rises.

That means, if you have stress, that means you're going to have more suicides. More sick people.

More people using the hospitals.

Theft is going to increase. And public unrest may brew!

Gee. Now who would want that? Except, all of those Democrats who are sewing the seeds of revolution.

Pushing for chaos in the streets. And taking officers on the field, while putting criminals back into the game?

The seeds of desperation have been sewn by this party. And what are they doing?

They're turning up the heat. And then what his this mean? If the government doesn't pay for this. That means the states have to pay for it. Which will make all of our states more vulnerable. Because they'll all have to dip into their rainy day fund.

Which makes, what?

All of our states more vulnerable.

Also, Chuck Schumer isn't primaried.

You can't wait for a political restoration when one of the political parties does not want restoration. You know, one party is not looking for common sense. In fact, one party is pushing for shooting those you disagree with. While funding Colour Revolutions in our own cities.

You know, while -- while everybody is trying to stop this -- this one guy, Melon, who is -- is sending a check for $130 million to pay for our military, all the short -- the shortfall for our military. $130 million personally coming out of his paycheck. What are they doing? They're spending almost $300 million on a No Kings rally. Hmm.

Which one is in favor of America, and which one is not?

You can't rely on a party that refuses to pass a clean funding bill, when they actually say out loud all the time, that the ends justify the means.

By the way, for those who don't get that. Maybe you soon will. The ends justify the means.

What does that mean? Well, to clarify. It's playing out right now.

That it's okay for people to suffer. It's okay if your plane is delayed or cancelled in the next few days.

It's okay for military families who are struggling already. Are pushed deeper into debt and despair. And children literally going to bed hungry.

Wake up, hungry, and then go to school hungry.

They know what is at stake.

But their plans, their goals.

Their primary election is more important. That's the ends, and it justifies all of the things that will happen. And all the things that will happen in our society. Every plane that's delayed.

Everybody that goes further into debt.

And every child that doesn't have food because their beloved SNAP program that they have enslaved people on, is now broke.

So here's what we have to do. First of all, you have to make sure that everyone. If you're traveling, the minute these airports start to fall apart and be your plan is cancelled or delayed because people aren't being paid. And so they're not showing up for work.

You make sure everyone knows that that's because Chuck Schumer didn't want to have -- be primaried by AOC. Okay?

Call your Democrat representative.

Anyone who is struggling to put food on the table. Anyone who knows of a hungry child. After helping them, call your Democrat representative, and say, "Enough is enough here."

But I would like to suggest something even further: And I'll share that with you, in 60 seconds.

So I'm going to ask you to do what you always do. And you do best. Get involved, and help in a real way. Our communities are going to suffer for a myriad of reasons. And right now, if you're living in a military town, they're already suffering. They're already suffering.

We have to rally our own communities. So our food banks all around the country are -- are going empty.

And we haven't even hit anything yet.

If the Democrats allow this to go through Thanksgiving, it will probably go through Christmas. That is going -- that will devastate the economy, that will -- we'll all be looking at food banks soon. Okay?

So we need to stock up our local food banks. You need to get your church involved. Get everybody involved. If your children has a food bank, please, deliver food to the local church. Okay?

We need to reach out to schools. We need to mobilize our churches, our civic groups, our community centers. We need to make sure that no one is going to bed hungry because of political inaction. This is our job in the first place. This is our church's job in the first place. But they have enslaved about 43 million people on food stamps. It's got to stop. It has to stop.

But you don't just -- you don't take a heroin user. And, oh, no more heroin user for you. You've got to have a plan. Well, there is no more plan. So it comes back to us.

Food is being used as a weapon. So we have to disarm that weapon. Because this makes that difference. You might say, well, you know what, those people can work. Or whatever it is you might say in your head. This is going to cause civil unrest, and you're already seeing it. The seeds are being planted online already. And if they don't give us our money, and they're not talking about the Democrats. They're talking about Donald Trump. They don't give us our money, well, then it's time take action ourself.

And you will see an increase in theft. You will see an increase in disillusionment. You will see an increase in violence in the streets.

It will happen. So let's disarm that. By doing the right thing ourselves. With kindness. With service. And responsibility.

Let's show people, that, you know, there is one side that actually cares about the poor. We always do! We're always there.

Let's demonstrate leadership when everybody else wants to demonstrate, I don't even know what.

You know, when the left fails to act, let us be the act.

When food becomes a bargaining chip, let's render it bulletproof, by putting some meals in some hands. Let's be seen doing real good. Politics be damned.

Principles are what matters.

You know, I can't believe all of these years, they've been saying, and they want your children to starve.

And they are -- I mean, I heard a Democrat this weekend say, we know this is going to cause pain. But it's important.

Really?

Because you have said when we're not talking about things like this, when we're talking about just not increasing the spending. Not decreasing. You're telling us, that we always want hungry children to starve.

You are literally taking the only safety net away, that they have. That you created. And enslaved them with.

I'm sorry. But, you know, an empty belly doesn't know compromise.

It doesn't.

We have to stand in the breach, while Congress stands idle.

How do you not pass a clean CR when food?

I mean, that's the minimum of decency, isn't it?

When they refuse, and I don't know when people will get this. What they're saying is, "We don't really care. We care about our politics more."

Enough is enough. Enough is enough. We'll do our part. We should feed the hungry in the first place.

We should support children.

We need to lean into service, a little bit more. And disarm the politics of hunger by living higher than politics, principles of love and responsibility.

I mean, it's -- it's clear, how truly little they care, for those at the bottom.

Time to carry the -- the torch for the powerless.

You know, I knew John huntsman, a good friend of mine. And in 2008, he almost lost his petrochemical company. He almost lost everything.

Had to mortgage everything. And everything was on the line. And when he finished to the banks. Now, I need a -- now I need a loan for charity. And the bank went, charity?

We don't loan for charity. And he said, I have promised millions of dollars to these charities. And they said, just tell them to wait. You're in a bad situation.

He said, "I'll tell you what, why don't I take you to the homeless shelter, and you tell the homeless to wait. Why don't I take you to the battered women's center with, and you tell them, 'Hey, there will be a place for you, so you can get away from your abusive spouse next month.' You tell them that."

He mortgaged literally his house and everything else, just to make his charitable contributions. That is a man of real principle. That is -- that's the way we should all live our life. First principles. Not asking you to mortgage the house. Just, if you have extra food, share it. Be aware.

So we don't have revolution on our streets.

Glenn's Show Prep

Concessions of a Transgendered Wrestler

The dark side of artificial intelligence: Amazon's 30,000 job cuts

Transcript

Your electric bill is SKYROCKETING because of one MASSIVE change

Transcript

How Big Food Companies Fed America a Diet of Lies | Jillian Michaels

The REAL danger of Democrats' shutdown: Hungry children and chaos

Transcript