Obama’s stumping in... Texas? Glenn chats with Gov. Rick Perry

May 09, 2013

Writer

On radio this morning, Glenn interviewed Governor Rick Perry (R-TX) about President Obama’s impending trip to Texas to kick off his job creation tour. You might be asking yourself, why in the world would the President go to a state that basically proves his economic theories don’t work?

Well, according to CEOs polled by Chief Executive magazine, Texas is the most business-friendly state in the U.S. based on a criteria of taxes and regulations, workforce quality, and living environment. Considering President Obama can use all the job creation advice he can get, Texas is probably a good place to start his tour.

Glenn and Gov. Perry talked about the policies that have allowed Texas to become a hub for new business and entrepreneurship, in what is still a very difficult economy. You can read the full transcript of the interview below:

GLENN: The president is going to meet with our own governor here in Texas, the governor of the great State of Texas, Governor Perry. I believe the last time that he was in town, the president got a letter from Governor Perry, and didn't he reject it or he just kind of brushed it off, I believe? We have Rick Perry on the phone now. Hello, Governor, how are you, sir?

GOVERNOR PERRY: Glenn Beck, good morning. It's a beautiful day in Texas. Thank you, sir. Of course, you already know that.

GLENN: Tell me, wasn't it the last time that you saw the president, didn't you give him the letter on the tarmac?

GOVERNOR PERRY: Actually the last time I saw the president, he was in Waco for the West Memorial for the EMTs and the firefighters that we lost there with the tragic explosion.

GLENN: Who was

GOVERNOR PERRY: The president was very civil and very appropriately gracious, but the time that we met on the tarmac in Austin, yes, I handed him the letter asking him to take a look at the issue of our border and how to secure the border, and we never heard back from the president directly. Now, one of his staff persons wrote a letter but, you know, you the key is the president's coming to Texas hopefully in good faith to learn how to create jobs and have a better place in America for a training ground for the president to learn how to do it right.

GLENN: Well, if he wants to learn how to create jobs or if America wants to learn how to create jobs, it's really quite simple: We just stop electing or hiring to put in the cabinet Marxists.

GOVERNOR PERRY: Well, in Texas we've got that figured out.

GLENN: We do? Okay, good. I didn't know. It seems to be a disease that is spreading all over the country. I didn't know.

GOVERNOR PERRY: You know, if you really want to be honest, and don't, you know, try to make some political statement, if results are, I mean just a really scientific look at the states and allow the states to be the laboratories of innovation and say that there are these 50 laboratories out there, Glenn, then who is it that's actually doing this right? So if the result is the creation of jobs which allow people freedom to live their lives as they see fit.

Now, certainly freedom to fail at an effort, but freedom to be unlimited in what you can what you can achieve and that's, to me, what America's really all about. And so if you look at it, from a just cold, scientific standpoint, where is the place that's created the most jobs both, you know, percentage wise and numbers in jobs in the last five years? Texas added almost 500,000 private sector jobs while this country, this entire country lost over 2 million private sector jobs. That's from March of '08 through March of 2013. 6.4%.

GLENN: Here's the problem. And Rick, you know I love you and I moved here because of the freedom, but we're having these companies move in and I'm glad to see them move in we have these companies move in and they are bringing all their voters from California and everywhere else and I'm afraid Texas is going to turn into Colorado. We need to have a big sign here someplace that says it's the freedom that creates jobs.

GOVERNOR PERRY: Yeah, that's an interesting observation, but I will suggest to you an erroneous observation for a couple of reasons. Number one, Colorado was never this hard red state to begin with. Colorado always had some liberal tendencies, and frankly had there not been an error made in Colorado with the gubernatorial candidate Scott McInnis back two, three years ago, he would have been elected and you would not have seen Colorado doing some of the things that they're doing today that tend to be substantially blue. But the key is the people that we're bringing to the State of Texas, they're givers. I mean, these the takers are staying in Colorado, Colorado or, you know, California or Illinois. They know not to come here and expect government handouts to be the answer. There are people that are coming here, want to be free from overtaxation, overregulation, overlitigation and expect to find a skilled workforce so that they can fill the jobs.

GLENN: Right, right. I'm not wait. You're misunderstanding me. I'm not saying that the companies are. I'm saying that the people who are moving here for those jobs, they're coming from California saying, "Something's wrong with California. It's all screwed up." And then they are coming into our communities and they are like, "I love, Texas. Of course, I'd like it to be a little more like home in California." And I'm afraid they will start voting for the same things that they were voting for in California. I mean, we need some sort of campaign that, you know, is going through the State of Texas that people understand when they move here, what makes it great is the freedom that we have. Because I know the companies understand because the companies, I moved my company down here and everybody knows we're moving here for the freedom, and my company gets it and my employees get it. But I'm afraid that there's, you know, people that come in with a lot of employees and they'll just move them all from California and the employees are just like, "I like California. Of course, it was all screwed up, but my company moved." We don't want we want to change their hearts and their minds on how to vote, and I'm not talking about Republican/Democrat. I'm talking about small government.

GOVERNOR PERRY: Freedom. We're talking about freedom.

GLENN: Right.

GOVERNOR PERRY: And I totally agree with you from the standpoint of it is our responsibility to teach people. We start teaching Texas history at a minimum in the seventh grade. Generally when you hit the ground here, you start learning about this state, the history of this state, the freedom, believing and fighting people that helped develop this state. But I think people come here and they are open to that message of freedom and they are fleeing places that are oppression from a tax and a regulatory and a legal standpoint. So I think they are open and I think you make a good point, but it's our responsibility as citizens and our responsibility as Texans to educate people every opportunity. I hope here in the next couple of hours, I have the opportunity to educate the president of the United States about freedom and about how powerful it is in the State of Texas and if people reflect that in this great state.

GLENN: (Laughing.) I'm sorry. I just can't get past that.

GOVERNOR PERRY: There's a little

GLENN: I just can't get past, I'd love to teach the president a little bit about freedom. Oh, I wish you the best today. I don't know how you do it, but I wish you the best, Governor. Thank you so much.

GOVERNOR PERRY: Hey, listen. You take care of yourself. By the way, great job down in Houston this last weekend. It was an incredibly successful convention for the National Rifle Association and a good weekend for the Second Amendment.

GLENN: It was. It was. Thank you very much, Governor. I appreciate it.

GOVERNOR PERRY: God bless you.

GLENN: Governor Rick Perry of Texas.

Silent genocide exposed: Are christians being wiped out in 2025?

Aldara Zarraoa / Contributor | Getty Images

Is a Christian Genocide unfolding overseas?

Recent reports suggest an alarming escalation in violence against Christians, raising questions about whether these acts constitute genocide under international law. Recently, Glenn hosted former U.S. Army Special Forces Sniper Tim Kennedy, who discussed a predictive model that forecasts a surge in global Christian persecution for the summer of 2025.

From Africa to Asia and the Middle East, extreme actions—some described as genocidal—have intensified over the past year. Over 380 million Christians worldwide face high levels of persecution, a number that continues to climb. With rising international concern, the United Nations and human rights groups are urging protective measures by the global community. Is a Christian genocide being waged in the far corners of the globe? Where are they taking place, and what is being done?

India: Hindu Extremist Violence Escalates

Yawar Nazir / Contributor | Getty Images

In India, attacks on Christians have surged as Hindu extremist groups gain influence within the country. In February 2025, Hindu nationalist leader Aadesh Soni organized a 50,000-person rally in Chhattisgarh, where he called for the rape and murder of all Christians in nearby villages and demanded the execution of Christian leaders to erase Christianity. Other incidents include forced conversions, such as a June 2024 attack in Chhattisgarh, where a Hindu mob gave Christian families a 10-day ultimatum to convert to Hinduism. In December 2024, a Christian man in Uttar Pradesh was attacked, forcibly converted, and paraded while the mob chanted "Death to Jesus."

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommends designating India a "Country of Particular Concern" and imposing targeted sanctions on those perpetrating these attacks. The international community is increasingly alarmed by the rising tide of religious violence in India.

Syria: Sectarian Violence Post-Regime Change

LOUAI BESHARA / Contributor | Getty Images

Following the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024, Syria has seen a wave of sectarian violence targeting religious minorities, including Christians, with over 1,000 killed in early 2025. It remains unclear whether Christians are deliberately targeted or caught in broader conflicts, but many fear persecution by the new regime or extremist groups. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a dominant rebel group and known al-Qaeda splinter group now in power, is known for anti-Christian sentiments, heightening fears of increased persecution.

Christians, especially converts from Islam, face severe risks in the unstable post-regime environment. The international community is calling for humanitarian aid and protection for Syria’s vulnerable minority communities.

Democratic Republic of Congo: A "Silent Genocide"

Hugh Kinsella Cunningham / Stringer | Getty Images

In February 2025, the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), an ISIS-affiliated group, beheaded 70 Christians—men, women, and children—in a Protestant church in North Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo, after tying their hands. This horrific massacre, described as a "silent genocide" reminiscent of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, has shocked the global community.

Since 1996, the ADF and other militias have killed over six million people, with Christians frequently targeted. A Christmas 2024 attack killed 46, further decimating churches in the region. With violence escalating, humanitarian organizations are urging immediate international intervention to address the crisis.

POLL: Starbase exposed: Musk’s vision or corporate takeover?

MIGUEL J. RODRIGUEZ CARRILLO / Contributor | Getty Images

Is Starbase the future of innovation or a step too far?

Elon Musk’s ambitious Starbase project in South Texas is reshaping Boca Chica into a cutting-edge hub for SpaceX’s Starship program, promising thousands of jobs and a leap toward Mars colonization. Supporters see Musk as a visionary, driving economic growth and innovation in a historically underserved region. However, local critics, including Brownsville residents and activists, argue that SpaceX’s presence raises rents, restricts beach access, and threatens environmental harm, with Starbase’s potential incorporation as a city sparking fears of unchecked corporate control. As pro-Musk advocates clash with anti-Musk skeptics, will Starbase unite the community or deepen the divide?

Let us know what you think in the poll below:

Is Starbase’s development a big win for South Texas?

Should Starbase become its own city?

Is Elon Musk’s vision more of a benefit than a burden for the region?

Shocking truth behind Trump-Zelenskyy mineral deal unveiled

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have finalized a landmark agreement that will shape the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations. The agreement focuses on mineral access and war recovery.

After a tense March meeting, Trump and Zelenskyy signed a deal on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, granting the U.S. preferential mineral rights in Ukraine in exchange for continued military support. Glenn analyzed an earlier version of the agreement in March, when Zelenskyy rejected it, highlighting its potential benefits for America, Ukraine, and Europe. Glenn praised the deal’s strategic alignment with U.S. interests, including reducing reliance on China for critical minerals and fostering regional peace.

However, the agreement signed this week differs from the March proposal Glenn praised. Negotiations led to significant revisions, reflecting compromises on both sides. What changes were made? What did each leader seek, and what did they achieve? How will this deal impact the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations and global geopolitics? Below, we break down the key aspects of the agreement.

What did Trump want?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump aimed to curb what many perceive as Ukraine’s overreliance on U.S. aid while securing strategic advantages for America. His primary goals included obtaining reimbursement for the billions in military aid provided to Ukraine, gaining exclusive access to Ukraine’s valuable minerals (such as titanium, uranium, and lithium), and reducing Western dependence on China for critical resources. These minerals are essential for aerospace, energy, and technology sectors, and Trump saw their acquisition as a way to bolster U.S. national security and economic competitiveness. Additionally, he sought to advance peace talks to end the Russia-Ukraine war, positioning the U.S. as a key mediator.

Ultimately, Trump secured preferential—but not exclusive—rights to extract Ukraine’s minerals through the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, as outlined in the agreement. The U.S. will not receive reimbursement for past aid, but future military contributions will count toward the joint fund, designed to support Ukraine’s post-war recovery. Zelenskyy’s commitment to peace negotiations under U.S. leadership aligns with Trump’s goal of resolving the conflict, giving him leverage in discussions with Russia.

These outcomes partially meet Trump’s objectives. The preferential mineral rights strengthen U.S. access to critical resources, but the lack of exclusivity and reimbursement limits the deal’s financial benefits. The peace commitment, however, positions Trump as a central figure in shaping the war’s resolution, potentially enhancing his diplomatic influence.

What did Zelenskyy want?

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Zelenskyy sought to sustain U.S. military and economic support without the burden of repaying past aid, which has been critical for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. He also prioritized reconstruction funds to rebuild Ukraine’s war-torn economy and infrastructure. Security guarantees from the U.S. to deter future Russian aggression were a key demand, though controversial, as they risked entangling America in long-term commitments. Additionally, Zelenskyy aimed to retain control over Ukraine’s mineral wealth to safeguard national sovereignty and align with the country’s European Union membership aspirations.

The final deal delivered several of Zelenskyy’s priorities. The reconstruction fund, supported by future U.S. aid, provides a financial lifeline for Ukraine’s recovery without requiring repayment of past assistance. Ukraine retained ownership of its subsoil and decision-making authority over mineral extraction, granting only preferential access to the U.S. However, Zelenskyy conceded on security guarantees, a significant compromise, and agreed to pursue peace talks under Trump’s leadership, which may involve territorial or political concessions to Russia.

Zelenskyy’s outcomes reflect a delicate balance. The reconstruction fund and retained mineral control bolster Ukraine’s economic and sovereign interests, but the absence of security guarantees and pressure to negotiate peace could strain domestic support and challenge Ukraine’s long-term stability.

What does this mean for the future?

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

While Trump didn’t secure all his demands, the deal advances several of his broader strategic goals. By gaining access to Ukraine’s mineral riches, the U.S. undermines China’s dominance over critical elements like lithium and graphite, essential for technology and energy industries. This shift reduces American and European dependence on Chinese supply chains, strengthening Western industrial and tech sectors. Most significantly, the agreement marks a pivotal step toward peace in Europe. Ending the Russia-Ukraine war, which has claimed thousands of lives, is a top priority for Trump, and Zelenskyy’s commitment to U.S.-led peace talks enhances Trump’s leverage in negotiations with Russia. Notably, the deal avoids binding U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s long-term defense, preserving flexibility for future administrations.

The deal’s broader implications align with the vision Glenn outlined in March, when he praised its potential to benefit America, Ukraine, and Europe by securing resources and creating peace. While the final agreement differs from Glenn's hopes, it still achieves key goals he outlined.

Did Trump's '51st state' jab just cost Canada its independence?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Did Canadians just vote in their doom?

On April 28, 2025, Canada held its federal election, and what began as a promising conservative revival ended in a Liberal Party regroup, fueled by an anti-Trump narrative. This outcome is troubling for Canada, as Glenn revealed when he exposed the globalist tendencies of the new Prime Minister, Mark Carney. On a recent episode of his podcast, Glenn hosted former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss, who provided insight into Carney’s history. She revealed that, as governor of the Bank of England, Carney contributed to the 2022 pension crisis through policies that triggered excessive money printing, leading to rampant inflation.

Carney’s election and the Liberal Party’s fourth consecutive victory spell trouble for a Canada already straining under globalist policies. Many believed Canadians were fed up with the progressive agenda when former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigned amid plummeting public approval. Pierre Poilievre, the Conservative Party leader, started 2025 with a 25-point lead over his Liberal rivals, fueling optimism about his inevitable victory.

So, what went wrong? How did Poilievre go from predicted Prime Minister to losing his own parliamentary seat? And what details of this election could cost Canada dearly?

A Costly Election

Mark Carney (left) and Pierre Poilievre (right)

GEOFF ROBINSPETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

The election defied the expectations of many analysts who anticipated a Conservative win earlier this year.

For Americans unfamiliar with parliamentary systems, here’s a brief overview of Canada’s federal election process. Unlike U.S. presidential elections, Canadians do not directly vote for their Prime Minister. Instead, they vote for a political party. Each Canadian resides in a "riding," similar to a U.S. congressional district, and during the election, each riding elects a Member of Parliament (MP). The party that secures the majority of MPs forms the government and appoints its leader as Prime Minister.

At the time of writing, the Liberal Party has secured 169 of the 172 seats needed for a majority, all but ensuring their victory. In contrast, the Conservative Party holds 144 seats, indicating that the Liberal Party will win by a solid margin, which will make passing legislation easier. This outcome is a far cry from the landslide Conservative victory many had anticipated.

Poilievre's Downfall

PETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

What caused Poilievre’s dramatic fall from front-runner to losing his parliamentary seat?

Despite his surge in popularity earlier this year, which coincided with enthusiasm surrounding Trump’s inauguration, many attribute the Conservative loss to Trump’s influence. Commentators argue that Trump’s repeated references to Canada as the "51st state" gave Liberals a rallying cry: Canadian sovereignty. The Liberal Party framed a vote for Poilievre as a vote to surrender Canada to U.S. influence, positioning Carney as the defender of national independence.

Others argue that Poilievre’s lackluster campaign was to blame. Critics suggest he should have embraced a Trump-style, Canada-first message, emphasizing a balanced relationship with the U.S. rather than distancing himself from Trump’s annexation remarks. By failing to counter the Liberal narrative effectively, Poilievre lost momentum and voter confidence.

This election marks a pivotal moment for Canada, with far-reaching implications for its sovereignty and economic stability. As Glenn has warned, Carney’s globalist leanings could align Canada more closely with international agendas, potentially at the expense of its national interests. Canadians now face the challenge of navigating this new political landscape under a leader with a controversial track record.

Glenn's Show Prep