Looking past the politics for something more

There’s something happening right now that is perplexing to us and disturbing to me personally, and I want to go back to the GLAAD story.  I could not believe how the media is just flabbergasted that I would be against burning people in ovens.  This happened before I went on vacation.  I was on the Piers Morgan show without Piers, I’m happy to say, and here’s what I said that has everybody shocked.

VIDEO

Glenn:  I said on the air this week I will stand with GLAAD.  I will stand with any, anybody who will stand up and say that’s crazy, that’s dangerous, that’s hetero fascism.  That’s what that is.  And we’re talking about Duck Dynasty?  Really?  Really?

That apparently is horrible.  They can’t believe that Glenn Beck would actually…what?  It’s sad that we have to talk about basic human rights like this in this day and age, but obviously there are crazy people like the Russian bigot that, you know, we have to say.  But here’s what’s more tragic, that the media would react like this:

VIDEO

I still don’t like the fact that he’s given Duck Dynasty a pass, but he’s standing up to a much bigger issue, you know?

Noah Michelson:  Huge, I mean, I think it’s more shocking to see Glenn Beck say that than to see the YMCA guys say that it’s not about gay people.  You know what I mean?  Any time like Glenn Beck or Bill O’Reilly or Pat Robertson says something that’s even remotely pro-gay, I have to like watch it again and make sure that I’m really seeing it correctly. 

But it’s awesome, you know?  I think we’re seeing this country change more and more and more, and the more that people like that, like Glenn Beck, if he can say something like that, amazing.

And maybe we underestimate Republicans in a certain way because many of them, particularly the libertarian bunch, are saying look, it’s not the government’s business what you’re doing.  Whether I have a moral issue with it or not isn’t even the point, because I suspect Glenn Beck as a Mormon would have a certain moral opposition to it.  But he’s saying that’s not my business.  And even if it were, we damn sure have to do something about this violence.

Noah Michelson:  No, it’s true, and I think we’ll take our supporters where we can get ’em.  You know what I mean?  If he wants to speak out, and he wants to join GLAAD, and he wants to, you know, make this a big issue, that’s awesome.

How does this warrant airtime?  Who thinks that this is a good thing?  Is there anybody within the sound of my voice that isn’t a psycho that thinks that the ovens is a good idea?  They’re shocked.  They’re surprised.  They have to watch it a couple times because Glenn Beck saying that, what?  What does that say about what they think about you and me?  Maybe, maybe we misunderstand or underestimate the Conservatives?  Maybe?  It’s insulting.  It’s ignorant.

 

But if they want to come out and recognize that hey, maybe…I support them.  I support them.  Now, there is another way to explain the surprise.  Maybe if people don’t believe the Russian guy that he’s really serious.  He’s just using extreme rhetoric.  That’s what they say about Ahmadinejad.  Well, he says okay, they’re going to burn in the fires of the Islamic fires, whatever.  You know, he’s just saying that for political reasons.

I have a general policy towards people who invoke the Holocaust or mass killing.  I take them at their word.  It doesn’t even have to be mass.  You say you’re going to kill me, I take you at your word.  When Iran says they want to wipe Israel off the map and exterminate all the Jews, I think they mean it.  If they don’t, isn’t it better to be safe than sorry?

I made this case when Osama bin Laden said that there would be, you know, blood on the streets of Manhattan, devastation in Manhattan, in New York City.  I believed him.  Unfortunately, the Conservatives, because Bill Clinton was in office, didn’t.  I did.  I wasn’t surprised when 9/11 happened.  I was just as much in shock and in horror, but I wasn’t surprised when I heard who did it.

Then there’s the Muslim Brotherhood.  They say their goal is to dismantle American institutions and turn all of the U.S. and all other nations into Muslim nations, the global caliphate.  They mean it.  They’re not using hyperbole.  They’re not joking.  They mean it.  And so every time that somebody makes a disturbing statement like the Russian guy did, I don’t shrug it off.  I take a stand.

 

I guess when I was younger I didn’t take a stand because I really didn’t think horrible things could happen in the world.  I was naïve.  I didn’t think evil existed.  It does.  It does.  There are two sides of every man.  There’s good nature and bad nature.  Which one do you choose?

So it has me standing up alongside people that, I never stood up before for Israel, but I’ll stand up for Israel, stand up for the Jewish people.  I’ll stand up for Egypt and the Egyptians.  I’ll stand with GLAAD.  I will stand with the Tea Party.  Yeah, I will stand with an atheist like Penn Jillette.  I’ll stand on the side of basic human rights and individual liberty over party politics every single time, and if I don’t, I expect you to call me out on it.

Good heavens, I walked arm in arm with Al Sharpton.  Do you remember that?  Yeah, that’s me.  He looked at me so dumbfounded and shocked.  I didn’t want to be there.  I gave him my word I would be, and he looked up at me and he said what the – and I said Al, I told you I would.  I’m a man of my word.  He was shocked.

Saturday night, it was about 1:00 in the morning, I wrote a note to Melissa Harris-Perry.  I don’t know if she ever got my e-mail, but I wrote her after I saw her apology this weekend.  Melissa Harris-Perry, we disagree on just about every political issue known to man, but we’re not really talking about politics here in what she did.  We’re talking about human beings.

We might disagree, but I’ve never sensed, like I do with Alec Baldwin.  Alec Baldwin I think is a bad guy.  I don’t think that Melissa Harris-Perry is a bad person, and she certainly doesn’t deserve to be wrecked over one bad segment that quite honestly I’ve seen much, much worse on NBC.

We can continue to have our debates and disagreements, but we have to be able to put all of that aside when true evil rises up like it does in Europe.  Right now in Russia, right now fascism is on the rise.  It’s appalling to me that people can’t look past the politics of Glenn Beck or of GLAAD to understand yeah, we should stand together.

By the way, this isn’t a gay issue.  It’s a human issue.  Aren’t we humans first before we have sex with people?  But for a second, let’s say it is a gay issue.  What part of my personal belief that you have a right to be who you are, and I have a right to be who I am, and that the government should get out of the marriage business entirely, and you should stay out of my church’s business, and I should stay out of your business, what part of that sounds bigoted?

I don’t get my marriage rules from the government.  I get them from my church.  Don’t tell my church who they have to marry.  I won’t tell you who you can and cannot marry – none of my business.  Don’t tell me I have to make a wedding cake for somebody, and I won’t tell you, you have to make a wedding cake, you know, for me.  Can’t we just let people be who they are?  Is that stance bigoted?

But like I said, this isn’t a gay issue.  It’s a human issue.  You ask me, are you a Conservative?  Are you a Libertarian?  No, I’m pretty sure I’m a human being first, and I was given inalienable rights, and so were you.  Why are we putting each other in boxes?  Why do we have to have categories for everything?  I know, I know, I know, it makes it easier, but it also makes it easier to become bigoted.  Putting us in categories only serves politicians and then limits us from the true freedom of thought.

I am a human who lives and breathes just like the next guy, whoever he’s sleeping with.  I have a family.  I like to laugh.  I like to play with my kids.  I like to watch a good movie.  Sometimes I see too many bad movies.  I’m not angry.  I’m not the evil conservative monster they say I am.  And get this one, I don’t think they’re the monster either.  What?

If we cannot lift ourselves out of the political muck that we are finding ourselves in, mired in deeper and deeper every day, we’re in trouble, because that’s where we’re stuck.  We’re stuck in this slimy mess where if you’re opposed to amnesty, it must be because you hate Mexicans.  If you oppose ObamaCare, you just want old people to die.  If you’re for lower taxes across the board, you hate the needy and the poor.  None of those are true.  None of those are true.

With Melissa Harris-Perry this weekend, with what she said about Romney and what she was going through, I wrote to her, and I said I’ve never thought that you were a bad person.  And I think you’re being made to pay for the collective, the collective mistakes of MSNBC, because I’ve seen bigger mistakes there, and it didn’t seem to make that much of a difference.

Are people not seeing?  Forget about them seeing us.  Are we seeing them?  Are we seeing their faces over fear?  Are we seeing freedom over control?  We can disagree about everything in politics.  That’s fine.  But let’s go out on a limb and get really crazy and say maybe we should unite on some big things like, I don’t know, people shouldn’t be put into ovens alive or even farther out on a limb, people just shouldn’t be put into ovens, even when they’re dead.

Eight-year-olds shouldn’t be forced to put suicide vests on and blow themselves up.  In fact, no person should be forced to put on a suicide vest and kill others.  You want to put on a suicide vest yourself?  You’re like I don’t know, that seems like a snappy number for me to wear today, and I want to blow myself up, go out and do it in the middle of a field.  I don’t really care.

People shouldn’t be forced to live a certain way.  I shouldn’t force my Christianity on you, and don’t you force your atheism on me.  If we’re going to survive, we have to be a nation where we can all live next to each other and get along, but that starts here.  When someone is bullied, we need to stand up with them, no matter who it is, because once the bully is done with them, he’s going to find someone else to pick on.

It was wrong when it happened on the playground when we were kids.  It’s wrong now.  When I was a kid, I didn’t think I could do anything about the bully then, because most of the time the bully was pushing me down, and the crowd strangely was cheering.  But I’m not afraid of bullies anymore.  They don’t hold any power over me.  Whether those bullies are Russian, Chinese, Arab, American, Marxist, Islamic, Christian, atheist, Republican, Democrat, I’m not afraid.  The only thing I’m afraid of losing is who I truly am, and I can’t lose that, and that can be taken from me.

Unfortunately, I have to give that one away myself.  So I stand with the little guy, every little guy, who has the right that we all do, all the rights that we find self-evident, a right to live, a right to pursue his or her happiness in the way he or she believes is right for him.  Freedom is the uniting principle of our time, and unfortunately, time is running out.  For the seventh consecutive year now, freedom in the world, it’s a report that comes out, says now that more countries are losing freedom then gaining it.

Why is that happening?  Because we’re talking about Duck Dynasty.  We’re talking about Glenn Beck instead of the Russian guy.  Russia, by the way, saw the most dramatic swing after Putin regained power, and surprise, surprise, the Arab Spring has led to strong authoritarian response.  You mean it’s not a Jeffersonian revolution?  So yes, Virginia, I will happily stand with GLAAD and anyone else who wants to stop real actual hate and real actual human rights abuses.

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.