President Obama had a bad year… but America had an even worse one

With Glenn on vacation for the holidays, TheBlaze’s national security editor Buck Sexton filled in as host of the Glenn Beck Radio Program this morning. We have recently heard politicians and pundits from both sides of the aisle refer to 2013 as the worst year of the Obama presidency, but Buck argued there is more to the story than the President’s approval rating. While 2013 was a bad year for President Obama, it was a worse year for the United States of America.

Obama the worst. I know what you're probably thinking. I'm just referring to the fact that he may be duly considered the worst president in, I don't know, over a hundred years if you're so inclined. And he views, though, this past year as the worst for him because it's really a reflection of the narcissism in this president that when the American people have a bad year, the biggest problem, the biggest issue as he sees it is that he's having a bad year. I don't really care that President Obama's having a bad year. In fact, I don't think the media should care, either, because vast riches and untold accolades await him in public life no matter what happens from hereon out. So just remember that as those of us in the conservative movement, those of us on the conservative side of things keep on pushing and spreading the truth about this administration. President Obama is going to end up, after his time in office, an incredibly rich and powerful and celebrated man.

So it's with that in mind, and I know you say that's probably unfair but it's also true, and I guarantee you it is true. With that in mind, though, I care much more about the fact that America has had a bad year. But it's not enough to think of this as one bad year. It's really just the culmination of a five-year progression towards a progressive agenda. This is the year during which we found ourselves constantly stumped by the lies, constantly left in the lurch because we had been promised so much. And even those of us who knew those promises would come to naught were surprised with the speed and ferocity with which they crashed on the shoals of the free market, on the shoals of the American way of doing business.

It's been a bad five years really. It's just that this year was the first time that the quisling partisans failed to explain it away. It was too much of a gut punch, too difficult for all of us. And so 2013 I think will be the year when we look back and say that the progressive central planning agenda collided with the reality of a free market and a free, though rapidly dwindling, economy. It is a year in which the president lied to us on a number of issues, and I think it's very important to recognize that these weren't lies that are easy for us to pass by and explain away. These were lies that affect us all. These were lies that you could even say in some regards subvert the democratic process, subverted the democratic process.

President Obama told us, as you know, that if you like your plan, you can keep it. President Obama's senior advisors told us that Benghazi was a response to a video, that it wasn't clear who was responsible from the outset. At first they said that the IRS was abusive and weaponized, weaponized for political purposes, probably the most frightening agency of the federal government has now turned on the American people, a subset of the American people. Those who like to use words like "freedom" and "patriot" and "liberty." That's quite a commentary on the federal government out of D.C. that those were the terms that marked you for extra scrutiny, as the bureaucrats said.

President Obama now says that that was not, in fact, anything to be concerned about, it was nothing about which we should be overly worried. In fact, it's really just right-wing hysteria, isn't it? Oh, no, the IRS, yes, yes, the inspector general from within came out and said it was completely unacceptable. And when the news cycle was against this president, he came out and said, "I won't stand for this." He did a fantastic job of false outrage and yet it quickly withered away, and we knew he was as unserious about accountability in the IRS as he was accountability for his own words on Obamacare.

The subversion of the democratic process through the lies of the chief executive, through the lies of the most powerful man in the world, the leader of the free world, whether he chooses to adopt and use that title or not, is something that I think will go down and mark this year as one that we should remember, unfortunately for many of the wrong reasons, or many reasons that are saddening to patriots and those who care about the Constitution and liberty. And yet, despite all of this, despite everything that I have told you as we go into the heart of the Christmas season and into the new year, 2014 is going to be a fight. I promise you that much. Don't think that it is not. 2014 is going to be a knock-down, drag-out between the forces inside America who say "Enough. We are standing athwart the proposed progress of the American left and saying, "You are taking us into a place we do not wish to go." Do you think that they're going to look at the past year, they're going to look at this year that we've just gone through as essentially the end state, the natural progression of the past five years? Of course not. Just bumps along the road. Just a few little issues, a few little things to be pushed aside, tossed away. No worry about your healthcare plan. Hey, plenty of time to get through a pathway to amnesty, plenty of time to use executive fiat to get regulations for the environment through that will cripple business, harm the economy and will never go through congress because if this president has done one thing, he has shown us that the legislature is useful for one thing and one thing only and that is for constantly whining and carping and saying that "they won't do my bidding."

The legislature in the republic that we live in now is increasingly superfluous. It's unnecessary. It's extraneous. We have a consolidation of power in this White House that even ten years ago nobody could have dreamed of. We have a president who openly defies not just the will of congress but defies the Courts who say, "You know, what you're doing is flatly unconstitutional." Does the administration back down? Do they say, "Okay, I will accept this court of appeals decision"? No. They take it to the Supreme Court. They take it to the mat. Just as he had to take his signature legislation to the Supreme Court, which passed only through a level of sophistry and trickery that is unbelievable to anybody who can read plain-letter English. That's the legacy of this president. That's the legacy of this four years which now has finally added one more onto the pile that tells us everything we needed to know.

And here we see today a deadline passes. You won't hear much about it. Many of you are out shopping spending time with your families focused on other, and quite honestly for the time being, more important things. Today was the day that you were supposed to have signed up for Obamacare to have coverage starting on January 1st. I don't even know if that's true anymore. I don't know if it's true because I don't know what the law actually says because the law has become meaningless. The law has become a tool, something to be used by the whim of the chief executive. That's it. Doesn't hold him back.

Front page image courtesy of the AP

The Woodrow Wilson strategy to get out of Mother’s Day

Stock Montage / Contributor, Xinhua News Agency / Contributor | Getty Images

I’ve got a potentially helpful revelation that’s gonna blow the lid off your plans for this Sunday. It’s Mother’s Day.

Yeah, that sacred day where you’re guilt-tripped into buying flowers, braving crowded brunch buffets, and pretending you didn’t forget to mail the card. But what if I told you… you don’t have to do it? That’s right, there’s a loophole, a get-out-of-Mother’s-Day-free card, and it’s stamped with the name of none other than… Woodrow Wilson (I hate that guy).

Back in 1914, ol’ Woody Wilson signed a proclamation that officially made Mother’s Day a national holiday. Second Sunday in May, every year. He said it was a day to “publicly express our love and reverence for the mothers of our country.” Sounds sweet, right? Until you peel back the curtain.

See, Wilson wasn’t some sentimental guy sitting around knitting doilies for his mom. No, no, no. This was a calculated move.

The idea for Mother’s Day had been floating around for decades, pushed by influential voices like Julia Ward Howe. By 1911, states were jumping on the bandwagon, but it took Wilson to make it federal. Why? Because he was a master of optics. This guy loved big, symbolic gestures to distract from the real stuff he was up to, like, oh, I don’t know, reshaping the entire federal government!

So here’s the deal: if you’re looking for an excuse to skip Mother’s Day, just lean into this. Say, “Sorry, Mom, I’m not celebrating a holiday cooked up by Woodrow Wilson!” I mean, think about it – this is the guy who gave us the Federal Reserve, the income tax, and don’t even get me started on his assault on basic liberties during World War I. You wanna trust THAT guy with your Sunday plans? I don’t think so! You tell your mom, “Look, I love you, but I’m not observing a Progressive holiday. I’m keeping my brunch money in protest.”

Now, I know what you might be thinking.

“Glenn, my mom’s gonna kill me if I try this.” Fair point. Moms can be scary. But hear me out: you can spin this. Tell her you’re honoring her EVERY DAY instead of some government-mandated holiday. You don’t need Wilson’s permission to love your mom! You can bake her a cake in June, call her in July, or, here’s a wild idea, visit her WITHOUT a Woodrow Wilson federal proclamation guilting you into it.

Shocking Christian massacres unveiled

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.