Sen. Rand Paul: Gang of 8 bill 'dead on arrival' in House

June 26, 2013

Writer

On radio this morning, Glenn spoke with Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) about two key issues: immigration reform and the Supreme Court’s decision on California’s Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act. Sen. Paul explained why he has faith in Speaker John Boehner and his Republican colleagues in the House and what the SCOTUS rulings mean for civil rights.

One of the gems to come out of the Senate’s immigration bill is a provision that seems to incentivize the hiring of illegal immigrants for business owners who wish to avoid paying Obamacare related penalties. “I'm thinking about lobbying to become an illegal immigrant so I wouldn't have to participate in Obamacare,” Sen. Paul joked.

“Isn’t that amazing,” Glenn asked. “We were talking about this this morning that if you are an employer, you can avoid all of the fines by hiring what used to be illegal immigrants. And so I mean, how do the labor unions even claim to represent the American worker and ignore this will cost so many people their jobs.”

Yesterday, TheBlaze had a remarkable story about five senators who voted for the immigration bill, but when pressed for specifics were unable to answer basic questions about the bill’s provisions. Much like the Affordable Care Act, this seems to be a case of ‘pass it to know what’s in it.’ It is all but certain the immigration bill will get through the Senate with flying colors, but there still appears to be a glimmer of hope in the House.

Sen. Paul emphatically said that the ‘Gang of Eight’ Senate bill will be “dead on arrival” in the House. But there is still a very real concern that the House will pass a Trojan horse-type bill that will look great to start but will ultimately be gutted by the Senate.

“So in the House… does John Boehner have the spine not to bring something to the floor,” Glenn asked.

“I think it's dead on arrival. The Senate bill is dead on arrival in the House,” Sen. Paul said. “The question is how does the conference committee work… I think the Speaker can decide on any one day what comes to the floor and what doesn't. He said he will not pass something with majority Democrats and a minority of Republicans. If he sticks to that, I think that we're pretty well protected. He has the power to protect us, and he said he will.”

“Do you believe him,” Glenn asked.

“I think, you know, I have very much desire – I very much desire to have immigration reform that does positive things, not bad things, and I hope that he's going to stand tall on this,” Sen. Paul responded.

“That wasn't the answer to the question,” Glenn said laughing. “The answer is really quite simple yes or no, but I'm to the going to push you on that.”

Next, Glenn moved on to the Supreme Court decisions on Prop 8 and DOMA. While Glenn is happy to have the government further distancing itself from regulating marriage as per the DOMA ruling, he believes the Prop 8 decision could pose a threat to our civil liberties.

“Let's start with Proposition 8,” Glenn said. “The idea that the government, now the Supreme Court has is that if the government decides not to back what the people have passed now twice, if they don't represent it and say, ‘We care about this,’ then it has no place to even go to the Supreme Court. So in other words, the people [are on their own].”

“Yeah, I want to preface this, Glenn, with making sure that you know how radical you are because you're sounding like Ron Paul on this issue,” Sen. Paul quipped. “Well, here's the thing on the marriage thing… What I would say is that when they affirmed the lower court or they sort of let the lower court decide on Proposition 8, I think they do it on a technicality… It is a way of technically punting so they don't make a decision on states deciding. So I don't think they are saying that California can't decide. I just think they did a technical punt, and so they're trying to say nothing is what they're trying to say.”

“But in doing that, the other side of the coin is there are 34 states who have decided in favor of traditional marriage. Those are affirmed now,” he continued. “I live in Kentucky and we have it as part of our Constitution. So I think… the good side to this ruling is they have affirmed that this is a states issue and the states can decide… They could have come down and affirmed the decision to strike down Proposition 8. They just let it stand without taking a position on it, which is different than affirming the rejection of Proposition 8. If they would affirm rejection of Proposition 8 and nationalized that, they would have overturned 34 states with traditional marriage and I think all you‑know‑what would have broken loose then. So they did take a more moderate course here, and I think traditional marriage laws are still upheld now in 34 states.”

As Stu pointed out, however, there is a still the concern that the state could ‘veto’ the will of the people, and it is now clear that the courts will not be in a position to defend them.

“What do you believe the Constitution says,” Glenn asked.

“I think on marriage, nothing,” Sen. Paul said. “And it says essentially the Ninth and Tenth Amendment leave it to the states. Our Founding Fathers never conceived of marriage being anywhere distant in Washington. And I would tell people who are for traditional marriage, the battle's going to be lost at the federal level. Concentrate on your state.”

'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 America’s next generation trading freedom for equity?

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