Governor Abbott: Locking Your Doors Doesn't Mean You Don't Like Your Neighbors

March 02, 2017

WRITER

Texas Governor Greg Abbott called into The Glenn Beck Program today, March 2, a day that also happens to be Texas Independence Day.

"I'm speaking to you from the Sam Houston bedroom in the governor's mansion in the state of Texas. I'm living in a governor's mansion that Sam Houston lived in . . . the historical connection is profound." Governor Abbott said.

In addition to recognizing an important holiday for Texans, the governor also discussed current issues like the Texas Senate approving measures for a convention of states, as well as the status of building a wall on the southern border.

"Mexico is our neighbor, and we need to have a good relationship with Mexico. And we need to be respectful of them, and they need to be respectful of us enforcing our rule of law and protecting our own sovereignty. We can foster that goodwill while building a border," Governor Abbott said. "If we can do all of that, Glenn, this will be something that will have a lasting effect, a positive effect for both Texas, the United States and Mexico."

GLENN: Texas Governor Greg Abbott, the federal government is beginning to accept contract bids for the building of the wall along the border with Mexico.

Governor Abbott, have you heard anything about that?

GREG: I have. But before I say that, I know you have listeners from across the world. But here in the state of Texas, we're celebrating Texas Independence Day.

GLENN: I know.

GREG: This is the day we became an independent nation ourself, many years ago, on March the 2nd.

GLENN: Yeah. We have a last piece in our serial this week. We've been doing Texas history. At the bottom of this hour, the last -- is it the last one? Or is tomorrow the last one?

PAT: Tomorrow is the last one.

GLENN: Tomorrow is the last one. Today we talk about Davy Crockett and Sam Houston. Which Sam Houston is an amazing guy. Has to be a governor that you look back on and say, "How could I be half the man that he was?"

I mean, taking on and standing against slavery in the South --

STU: At that time.

GLENN: -- at that time was a big deal. That guy was really brave.

GREG: He's amazing. And as I speak to you this moment, I'm speaking to you from the Sam Houston bedroom in the governor's mansion in the state of Texas. I'm living in a governor's mansion that Sam Houston lived in.

GLENN: Wow.

PAT: That's pretty cool.

GREG: And so the historical connection is profound.

GLENN: Yeah. So, Greg, let's talk a little bit about the border wall. Do you believe it is actually going to be built?

GREG: Oh, I know it is. And as you were alluding to in your intro, the request for bids has already been issued. And people are making bids right now. The time period for the bids closes here in just a couple of weeks. The bid will be announced in early April. Meaning that the work is going to begin in early April. So the administration is moving very quickly on this.

This round of bids is what's called a first tranche. And it will involve three sections across the border. One of the sections is in Texas. It's near what we call the Presidio region. It's going to be about 1- to 200 miles southeast of El Paso, Texas. It's that border-crossing area that has been penetrated heavily by cartel activity. And it's kind of in urgent need to build the wall in that sector.

The other two new sectors will be in other states. I think, if I recall correctly, it is in New Mexico and Arizona.

Bottom line, this is the first of what should be three different tranches of adding wall to the border. And this is going to get done.

PAT: So, Governor, are they keeping you in that loop? Are you being involved in those discussions? Because it would seem pretty logical for you to be a part of that.

GREG: Yes. I just returned from a five-day trip to Washington, DC, visiting with administration officials. And this is where it was first announced to us, being the governors. We have an annual governors' conference in Washington, DC, at the end of February. And one of the topics was the border wall. And it was told to us at that time what was going to be taking place at the border. But frankly before that, several weeks before that, I was on a flyover of the border with a new secretary of Homeland Security, John Kelly, when we were talking about the very issue. So at multiple levels in multiple time frames, I've been informed about what's going on, and they are keeping Texas in the loop.

GLENN: So do you see a time, in a short period, relatively speaking, where the border is actually closed off, with a big, beautiful door?

GREG: Well, remember this, and that is, there are large segments of the Texas Mexico border and US-Mexico border that already have walls along there. Several weeks ago, I had US Homeland Security secretary John Kelly. And we flew around. And he got to see for the first time for him the border wall as it currently exists in the Rio Grande valley. And so there are large multi-mile segments of border wall already there, that are working very effectively, that serve as a funneling device for those who are trying to cross the border, especially cracking down on the cartels and what they are trying to do along the border.

GLENN: How are you going to get around the people who say you're going to cut my land in half -- I know this will be a favorite question of yours. The EPA.

GREG: The EPA is under a new regime. One of the people I met with in Washington, DC, is Scott Pruitt, the new EPA administrator. And he is restoring the EPA to its original intent, which is not to be the dictator-in-chief in Washington, DC.

But the EPA is supposed to work in collaboration with the states. And believe me, that's exactly what he's going to do. The EPA challenges will be greatly diminished. That aside, we know that private parties will be filing lawsuits along those lines.

But going back to the first part of your question, a lot of the easements, a lot of the right-to-ways (phonetic) have already either been purchased or agreements entered into by the United States government. Remembering this, because people forget, it was under the Bush administration that the border wall -- or let's call it border fence. They call it different names. Was initially entered into. If I recall correctly -- don't hold me to this, but you'll know this. And you'll be able to bring it up later.

I think even people like Nancy Pelosi voted in favor of it at the time. So there was a border fence in the territory or land needed for that border fence, stretching from Brownsville all the way to San Diego. And many of the segments are already either owned or have building rights by the federal government.

That said, there are portions that the federal government does not have. It could be private land. It could be other parts of land they don't have. And they will work around that.

But let's go back to kind of the premise you're talking about here. And that is, I can't tell you there's going to be a yard by yard border wall stretching from Brownsville, Texas, to El Paso, Texas. There could be segments where there is not a border wall. But what I do know from talking to the administration, learning about what their game plan is, and that is, they are finally going to regain sovereign control over the border through multiple layers of security. One of those layers is a wall. A key factor is even a wall alone is not going to stop cross-border activity. You have to have boots on the ground so they are dedicating 5,000 more border patrol agents. Many more ICE agents so that they have the personnel which are needed, but also the detection equipment, the boats, the planes, cameras, et cetera, so that they are going to regain control of our border.

GLENN: So, Governor Abbott, how do we make this -- I mean, here's the problem that we've had now with the last administration. And, quite honestly, I fear with this administration, is it's not -- we're not changing laws, and we're not strengthening the laws. What we're doing is strengthening the Oval Office and the administration.

So this president can be great on the border. But what do we do -- what do we have at the end of this that, in four years or eight years, somebody else doesn't just come in and reverse it all?

GREG: Well, you raised an important issue from two perspectives: First of all, what the Trump administration really is doing is -- is -- as you say, they're not making new laws. They're finally applying and enforcing the laws, as they have long existed. The reason why we're in the problem that we are in today is because over a period of decades, there's been a gradual erosion in the enforcement of the laws.

And this is what's going to happen. When you refuse and fail to enforce the laws, in that people will continue to gradually evade them and not abide by them. And that is what has led us to the position today, where a new administration finally says, "We have to put up a wall."

After the -- after the current administration -- listen, life changes. And you can't say for certainty. Someone may not come back in and tear down the wall. Here's what we need to do to make it more effective. And that is, if you look at some of the concerns raised about the wall, especially concerns raised by Mexico, what really needs to be done is to establish both a better attitude and a better approach about why we're doing it. This is not a signal of hostility towards Mexico. This is a signal of our own concern of protecting our own home.

It's the way that you or your listeners act probably every night, that is many of you lock your doors at night. You don't lock your doors at night because you don't like your neighbor next door. You want to protect your own safety and your own family, living in friendship with your neighbors.

And that's the attitude that we need to foster with Mexico. Mexico is our neighbor. And we need to have a good relationship with Mexico. And we need to be respectful of them, and they need to be respectful of us enforcing our rule of law and protecting our own sovereignty. We can foster that goodwill while building a border. This will be a border wall. This will be -- and maintain our positive -- Mexico is a huge trade partner with us.

If we can do all of that, Glenn, this will be something that will have a lasting effect, a positive effect for both Texas, the United States, and Mexico.

GLENN: How do you feel about a tariff on Mexico?

GREG: You know, I've heard a lot of analysis about this. And especially when I was in Washington, DC, this past week and go through the analysis, and here is what I am hearing: It's called the border adjustment tax, or the bat tax. And I'm hearing the real reason for that is to pay for the other corporate tax reduction.

And when people talk about going through the mathematical equation of how the border adjustment tax is supposed to work, it seems like it keeps running into challenges. And I hear that the administration may not be in favor -- I hear the US Senate may not be in favor of it.

I hear that businesses may not be in favor of it.

And so it seems like it keeps running into obstacle after obstacle. And I would say it's tough to predict that the border adjustment tax will actually come into effect.

GLENN: We're just going to run out of time with you. So let me just get to the Convention of States. Passed in the Senate, are we going to see this push through? And do you have any idea what happened to Utah or other states as you're meeting with the border -- or, with the governors?

Are other states jumping on board, or is this taking a backseat now?

GREG: On the Texas side, remember that in the last legislative session that we had two years ago, the Convention of States' plan passed in the Texas House of Representatives.

So there's every reason to expect that those same representatives will not change their votes. They will vote the same way they did last time -- and so -- and it did not pass in the Texas Senate last time. So getting it passed in the Texas Senate was a game-changer. And it should lead to the passage in the state of Texas of the Convention of States.

Texas will join now a growing number of states that have passed a Convention of States. And when we do so, it unleashes me and other leaders in the state of Texas to explain to people across the country why this is needed. Remember this -- and I know we're running out of time. But let me make this really important point. And that is, I was not one of the leaders or a promoter of the Convention of States up until recently. What changed me and what brought this out of me, it was very simple, it was more than a philosophical idea. It was a practical idea.

My necessity for passing a Convention of States was borne out of filing 31 lawsuits against the Obama administration and realizing how not just the federal government, but the federal courts have been broken in, they had departed from our United States Constitution. And there's only one way that we as a country are going to restore our Constitution the way that it was intended, and that is for the people of the United States of America to take back our country and to restore the Constitution to what it was intended. Not rewrite it.

Remembering this, you, Glenn, you know, and your listeners know, you can recite what the Tenth Amendment said. And that is, all power not delegated to the United States in the Constitution is reserved to the states or to the people, period.

And that's the problem. It doesn't contain the additional clause that it needs, that says, and the states have the power to enforce the Tenth Amendment. And we need that additional clause in there so that courts will stop denying states the authority to enforce the Tenth Amendment.

GLENN: I think one of the best governors in America. In fact, people in Texas feel -- the last poll came out last week. Texans, asked their opinion of all of the statewide officeholders, including our US senators, who are awful popular here. Ted Cruz very popular, he -- Governor Abbott was the most popular by a wide margin. Congratulations on that. And thanks for being with us, Governor Abbott.

GREG: Thank you so much, Glenn. God bless.

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

PHILL MAGAKOE / Contributor | Getty Images

Kirk’s tragic death challenges us to rise above fear and anger, to rebuild bridges where others build walls, and to fight for the America he believed in.

I’ve only felt this weight once before. It was 2001, just as my radio show was about to begin. The World Trade Center fell, and I was called to speak immediately. I spent the day and night by my bedside, praying for words that could meet the moment.

Yesterday, I found myself in the same position. September 11, 2025. The assassination of Charlie Kirk. A friend. A warrior for truth.

Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins.

Moments like this make words feel inadequate. Yet sometimes, words from another time speak directly to our own. In 1947, Dylan Thomas, watching his father slip toward death, penned lines that now resonate far beyond his own grief:

Do not go gentle into that good night. / Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Thomas was pleading for his father to resist the impending darkness of death. But those words have become a mandate for all of us: Do not surrender. Do not bow to shadows. Even when the battle feels unwinnable.

Charlie Kirk lived that mandate. He knew the cost of speaking unpopular truths. He knew the fury of those who sought to silence him. And yet he pressed on. In his life, he embodied a defiance rooted not in anger, but in principle.

Picking up his torch

Washington, Jefferson, Adams — our history was started by men who raged against an empire, knowing the gallows might await. Lincoln raged against slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. raged against segregation. Every generation faces a call to resist surrender.

It is our turn. Charlie’s violent death feels like a knockout punch. Yet if his life meant anything, it means this: Silence in the face of darkness is not an option.

He did not go gently. He spoke. He challenged. He stood. And now, the mantle falls to us. To me. To you. To every American.

We cannot drift into the shadows. We cannot sit quietly while freedom fades. This is our moment to rage — not with hatred, not with vengeance, but with courage. Rage against lies, against apathy, against the despair that tells us to do nothing. Because there is always something you can do.

Even small acts — defiance, faith, kindness — are light in the darkness. Reaching out to those who mourn. Speaking truth in a world drowning in deceit. These are the flames that hold back the night. Charlie carried that torch. He laid it down yesterday. It is ours to pick up.

The light may dim, but it always does before dawn. Commit today: I will not sleep as freedom fades. I will not retreat as darkness encroaches. I will not be silent as evil forces claim dominion. I have no king but Christ. And I know whom I serve, as did Charlie.

Two turning points, decades apart

On Wednesday, the world changed again. Two tragedies, separated by decades, bound by the same question: Who are we? Is this worth saving? What kind of people will we choose to be?

Imagine a world where more of us choose to be peacemakers. Not passive, not silent, but builders of bridges where others erect walls. Respect and listening transform even the bitterest of foes. Charlie Kirk embodied this principle.

He did not strike the weak; he challenged the powerful. He reached across divides of politics, culture, and faith. He changed hearts. He sparked healing. And healing is what our nation needs.

At the center of all this is one truth: Every person is a child of God, deserving of dignity. Change will not happen in Washington or on social media. It begins at home, where loneliness and isolation threaten our souls. Family is the antidote. Imperfect, yes — but still the strongest source of stability and meaning.

Mark Wilson / Staff | Getty Images

Forgiveness, fidelity, faithfulness, and honor are not dusty words. They are the foundation of civilization. Strong families produce strong citizens. And today, Charlie’s family mourns. They must become our family too. We must stand as guardians of his legacy, shining examples of the courage he lived by.

A time for courage

I knew Charlie. I know how he would want us to respond: Multiply his courage. Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins. Out of darkness, great and glorious things will sprout — but we must be worthy of them.

Charlie Kirk lived defiantly. He stood in truth. He changed the world. And now, his torch is in our hands. Rage, not in violence, but in unwavering pursuit of truth and goodness. Rage against the dying of the light.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck resurrects the 9-12 Project to support Charlie Kirk's family

Glenn Beck is once again calling on his loyal listeners and viewers to come together and channel the same unity and purpose that defined the historic 9-12 Project. That movement, born in the wake of national challenges, brought millions together to revive core values of faith, hope, and charity.

Glenn created the original 9-12 Project in early 2009 to bring Americans back to where they were in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. In those moments, we weren't Democrats and Republicans, conservative or liberal, Red States or Blue States, we were united as one, as America. The original 9-12 Project aimed to root America back in the founding principles of this country that united us during those darkest of days.

This new initiative draws directly from that legacy, focusing on supporting the family of Charlie Kirk in these dark days following his tragic murder.

The revival of the 9-12 Project aims to secure the long-term well-being of Charlie Kirk's wife and children. All donations will go straight to meeting their immediate and future needs. If the family deems the funds surplus to their requirements, Charlie's wife has the option to redirect them toward the vital work of Turning Point USA.

This campaign is more than just financial support—it's a profound gesture of appreciation for Kirk's tireless dedication to the cause of liberty. It embodies the unbreakable bond of our community, proving that when we stand united, we can make a real difference.
Glenn Beck invites you to join this effort. Show your solidarity by donating today and honoring Charlie Kirk and his family in this meaningful way.

You can learn more about the 9-12 Project and donate HERE

The dangerous lie: Rights as government privileges, not God-given

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.

Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.

This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.

This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.

From Muhammad to Marx

The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.

Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.

Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.

This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.

Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Is Gen Z’s anger over housing driving them toward socialism?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Glenn's Show Prep