Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

David Barton talks "We are all Catholics" movement

February 16, 2012
Wilson

Writer

On radio this morning, David Barton called into the show to talk to Stu and Pat about the recent attacks on religious freedom being perpetuated by the Obama administration. Barton discussed Harry Reid's tactics to keep the Blunt Conscience Protection Amendment out of the latest legislation, as well as the effect that Beck fans have had in helping push back against the attacks on faith.

Read the rush transcript of the interview below:

PAT: 1‑888‑727‑BECK. Pat and Stu for Glenn who is doing something pretty big now and he'll have all the details for you Monday. In the meantime, we have David Barton on the line. David, welcome to the Glenn Beck Program.

BARTON: Hey, guys. Thanks for having me. Good to be with you.

PAT: You've been following pretty closely, I think, this whole development about the attack against faith and conscience and the Catholic church. What's ‑‑ what's the latest that you have about what's going on with this and how this supposed compromise is going down?

BARTON: Yeah. What happened is, of course, yesterday Glenn talked about it a good bit and I will tell you, it had a big impact, no question about it. I talked to senators in DC and their phones were lit up. Actually folks had trouble calling through the switchboard number because there was so much coming in.

PAT: Good.

BARTON: And so that's really good news. People responded. They made their voice heard and they did so in such a way that actually caused Senator Reid to take a different course of tactics. It looked like yesterday or the day before Senator Reid was going to allow the Blunt Conscience Protection Bill to come up and, you know, the things folks have got to understand on this thing is this is not about the Catholic church, it is not about contraception, it is not about abortion. This is conscience protection for everybody.

PAT: Right.

BARTON: And this has been going on with this administration for three and a half years. I can go through a litany of what they've been doing, but most recently it's the Catholic church. So, Blunt's got this bill. It was coming up yesterday. All these calls were coming there and then the White House and the press secretary jumps out and says, No way, Obama is not backing off this, he's sticking right with it, and they're getting inundated with calls. So, then here comes Reid and he says, Okay, I'm going to take this amendment off. You're not going to be able to vote.

And the way they do that in the Senate ‑‑ you really can't kill an amendment in the Senate. You have to let amendments go through. In the House you can kill amendments. You run it through the rules committee and no amendment is allowed to come to the floor of the House unless the rules committee approves it. In the Senate you can bring an amendment to the floor, you know, any time you want to if you can get through the procedure.

So, what ‑‑ and I hate to sound complicated, but here's what Reid did. He filled it up with what's called perfecting amendments. In other words, every slot that was left, he said, I've got an amendment and he just started loading it up with his own amendments so that there was no time left for any other amendment. He just filled it up with everything he can think of.

PAT: Wow.

BARTON: He's basically taken over all the time and what it means as a result is that they're going to have to have a cloture vote on all of his amendments that have come up. They'll probably do that Friday. So, unless ‑‑

PAT: So, it didn't happen yesterday, in other words?

BARTON: It did not happen. And if they can get 60 votes on Friday, then it's not going to happen, they've killed Blunt's Conscience Protection. I don't think they can get 60 votes. There's too many Republicans on this thing and some Democrats, as well, which probably means after Friday Reid's plan will go down. So, right now if things go as we think it will go, probably the week of February 27th Blunt's amendment will come back up on Conscience Protection.

So, it really worked yesterday. Lots of pressure put Reid in a tough spot and rather than backing off, he's bowed up his back and said, You're not going to tell me what to do and so he's taking over all the time on the floor from now through the end of the week, essentially.

STU: I will say, David, if he did say that, he said it a lot more boring than you sounded. He never sounds that excited. You can go to glennbeck.com, by the way, and get all the details on who to call and the numbers and everything else. You go there now and see We're All Catholics that Glenn's been talking about the last couple of days and it's huge.

By the way, I was looking through one of these polls that came out about this issue, David, and, you know, I thought this was a key ‑‑ a key thing that no one's really talked about which is, you know, Catholics have obviously, you think, would be the most ‑‑ most ‑‑ most offended and I think every faith has to be offended because this is such an overstep by the Federal Government, but when you look at ‑‑ the question was asked was the question brought up by the clergy at church. Now, there was a letter that was supposed to be read in every church or at least almost every church; is that right?

BARTON: Well, in Catholic churches, Catholic churches came out with a letter to be read and you probably know the military side because Catholic military chaplains would read it, as well, and the Obama administration Department of Defense folks stepped in and said, wait a minute, we've got to edit that letter before you read it and they actually marked out parts of the pastoral letter for military chaplains to read which is another conscience violation.

STU: Yeah, but this is supposed to go ‑‑

BARTON: The government doesn't get to mark out what you say. There was a letter to be read and that's what ‑‑ that's what all Catholics were to read to their congregations on that Sunday.

STU: It was supposed to go to all congregations, but listen to this stat from the polls. Was it brought up by clergy at church? Among Catholics that attend church weekly, only 32% say "yes."

PAT: Wow.

STU: And that is a major problem. No wonder there's not this revolt. No wonder the Obama administration beliefs they can get away with it. If only 32% of people are hearing about this that are going to church every week in the Catholic church, they're just depending on people not knowing about the issue.

BARTON: And that's where, you know, what Glenn's got going, we're all Catholics now is ‑‑ well, that's just that population. There's a bunch of us, millions that know about it now that aren't necessarily in the Catholic church and we're making our voice heard. So, if they counted on it being a Catholic only issue and being silenced because only 32% heard, that didn't work out. Now millions and millions know about it and this thing really has taken off. There's been a whole coalition of groups and folks that have made this a huge issue as Glenn has and so if that's what the administration counted on, it backfired.

PAT: So, David, what do we do? Do we continue to call senators?

BARTON: Well, this is ‑‑ I've got to be careful how I say this, but this is one of the problems with conservatives. We tend to get riled up and get inspired to do something and we don't tend to stay in there very long.

PAT: Right. Yeah.

BARTON: And so, you know, he all got riled up yesterday. We shut the switchboards down. We let the senators know what we think and they're counting on us not really staying on this thing until the 27th of February or whenever they bring this up. So, they try to outlast us, they try to wear us down, and then we'll all get discouraged and say it doesn't matter because they all do the same thing and so what we've got to do is we've got to keep the pressure on and the heat on and we've got to call the senators and say, I'm outraged that you wouldn't let your leader get away with killing all the amendments. What happened to free speech and ‑‑ you know, whatever it takes for us to express. We cannot go away on this thing until we win this and, you know, the House will come up later in the year, but the Senate is up right now. We didn't think the Senate would be up until much later in the year, but this is a ‑‑ I really think that when they started this, they hoped to do it real quick, before pressure got put on. They got so much pressure yesterday that they said, whoops, let's back off. So, we're really driving them right now, but we just can't let them outlast us or outwait us. We've got to keep the pressure on.

PAT: So, we need longer attention spans this time?

BARTON: Exactly right. We don't need to microwave mentality on this thing. We're here to say.

PAT: Yeah. Keep the pressure on. All right. And you can go to glennbeck.com and find out how to get a hold of your senator and by the way, you have two of them. If you don't know them, that's probably a problem at this point. Probably a problem, but ‑‑

STU: Would you say?

PAT: Yeah. Not that hard to find out. David, thanks a lot. Appreciate all you do.

BARTON: Thanks, guys. Thanks for all you're doing.

PAT: All right. David Barton. You know, it's nice that it had an impact yesterday, but like David said, we've got to keep it up.

STU: Yeah.

PAT: We have to keep going.

STU: It's all about diligence.

Is the U.N. plotting to control 30% of U.S. land by 2030?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

A reliable conservative senator faces cancellation for listening to voters. But the real threat to public lands comes from the last president’s backdoor globalist agenda.

Something ugly is unfolding on social media, and most people aren’t seeing it clearly. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) — one of the most constitutionally grounded conservatives in Washington — is under fire for a housing provision he first proposed in 2022.

You wouldn’t know that from scrolling through X. According to the latest online frenzy, Lee wants to sell off national parks, bulldoze public lands, gut hunting and fishing rights, and hand America’s wilderness to Amazon, BlackRock, and the Chinese Communist Party. None of that is true.

Lee’s bill would have protected against the massive land-grab that’s already under way — courtesy of the Biden administration.

I covered this last month. Since then, the backlash has grown into something like a political witch hunt — not just from the left but from the right. Even Donald Trump Jr., someone I typically agree with, has attacked Lee’s proposal. He’s not alone.

Time to look at the facts the media refuses to cover about Lee’s federal land plan.

What Lee actually proposed

Over the weekend, Lee announced that he would withdraw the federal land sale provision from his housing bill. He said the decision was in response to “a tremendous amount of misinformation — and in some cases, outright lies,” but also acknowledged that many Americans brought forward sincere, thoughtful concerns.

Because of the strict rules surrounding the budget reconciliation process, Lee couldn’t secure legally enforceable protections to ensure that the land would be made available “only to American families — not to China, not to BlackRock, and not to any foreign interests.” Without those safeguards, he chose to walk it back.

That’s not selling out. That’s leadership.

It's what the legislative process is supposed to look like: A senator proposes a bill, the people respond, and the lawmaker listens. That was once known as representative democracy. These days, it gets you labeled a globalist sellout.

The Biden land-grab

To many Americans, “public land” brings to mind open spaces for hunting, fishing, hiking, and recreation. But that’s not what Sen. Mike Lee’s bill targeted.

His proposal would have protected against the real land-grab already under way — the one pushed by the Biden administration.

In 2021, Biden launched a plan to “conserve” 30% of America’s lands and waters by 2030. This effort follows the United Nations-backed “30 by 30” initiative, which seeks to place one-third of all land and water under government control.

Ask yourself: Is the U.N. focused on preserving your right to hunt and fish? Or are radical environmentalists exploiting climate fears to restrict your access to American land?

  Smith Collection/Gado / Contributor | Getty Images

As it stands, the federal government already owns 640 million acres — nearly one-third of the entire country. At this rate, the government will hit that 30% benchmark with ease. But it doesn’t end there. The next phase is already in play: the “50 by 50” agenda.

That brings me to a piece of legislation most Americans haven’t even heard of: the Sustains Act.

Passed in 2023, the law allows the federal government to accept private funding from organizations, such as BlackRock or the Bill Gates Foundation, to support “conservation programs.” In practice, the law enables wealthy elites to buy influence over how American land is used and managed.

Moreover, the government doesn’t even need the landowner’s permission to declare that your property contributes to “pollination,” or “photosynthesis,” or “air quality” — and then regulate it accordingly. You could wake up one morning and find out that the land you own no longer belongs to you in any meaningful sense.

Where was the outrage then? Where were the online crusaders when private capital and federal bureaucrats teamed up to quietly erode private property rights across America?

American families pay the price

The real danger isn’t in Mike Lee’s attempt to offer more housing near population centers — land that would be limited, clarified, and safeguarded in the final bill. The real threat is the creeping partnership between unelected global elites and our own government, a partnership designed to consolidate land, control rural development, and keep Americans penned in so-called “15-minute cities.”

BlackRock buying entire neighborhoods and pricing out regular families isn’t by accident. It’s part of a larger strategy to centralize populations into manageable zones, where cars are unnecessary, rural living is unaffordable, and every facet of life is tracked, regulated, and optimized.

That’s the real agenda. And it’s already happening , and Mike Lee’s bill would have been an effort to ensure that you — not BlackRock, not China — get first dibs.

I live in a town of 451 people. Even here, in the middle of nowhere, housing is unaffordable. The American dream of owning a patch of land is slipping away, not because of one proposal from a constitutional conservative, but because global powers and their political allies are already devouring it.

Divide and conquer

This controversy isn’t really about Mike Lee. It’s about whether we, as a nation, are still capable of having honest debates about public policy — or whether the online mob now controls the narrative. It’s about whether conservatives will focus on facts or fall into the trap of friendly fire and circular firing squads.

More importantly, it’s about whether we’ll recognize the real land-grab happening in our country — and have the courage to fight back before it’s too late.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

URGENT: FIVE steps to CONTROL AI before it's too late!

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

  

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn: Only Trump dared to deliver on decades of empty promises

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

The Islamic regime has been killing Americans since 1979. Now Trump’s response proves we’re no longer playing defense — we’re finally hitting back.

The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.

Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.

It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.

Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.

The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.

The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.

Operation Midnight Hammer

The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.

   USAF / Handout | Getty Images

To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.

As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.

They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.

If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.

This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.

What comes next

We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.

Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.

That would be catastrophic.

The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.

The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?

Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.

Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.

Now we pray

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.

The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.

He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Globalize the Intifada? Why Mamdani’s plan spells DOOM for America

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

If New Yorkers hand City Hall to Zohran Mamdani, they’re not voting for change. They’re opening the door to an alliance of socialism, Islamism, and chaos.

It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

   Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

 

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.