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

Rand Paul: If you want immigration reform, you need to secure the border first

July 23, 2014
Radio Clips

The Glenn Beck Program

Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) has yet to confirm whether or not he will seek the Republican nomination for president in 2016, but he recently wrapped up a trip to Silicon Valley in which he met with industry heavyweights. On radio this morning, Paul joined Glenn to discuss his trip in addition to current events like immigration, Israel, and Russia.

Glenn praised Paul’s trip to Silicon Valley because he believes many of those in the tech industry right now are not the leftists they are believes to be. Instead, they are much more in line with the libertarian principles Paul espouses.

“Senator Rand Paul was just out in Silicon Valley and had a great reception… I think that these guys – and they always have – support the Democrats and are liberals. But they're really not,” Glenn said. “The ones that I know are much more libertarian… Here comes Rand Paul. Rand Paul is talking to them as libertarians, and they are connecting with him.”

Paul explained many of the people he spoke to are inventing things that back up against big government. He used the car service Uber as an example.

“One of the things I learned when I'm out there and I think you learn if you look at the high-tech industry, is a lot of their new invasions back up against big government,” Paul said. “So like Uber is this miraculous thing that gets around cities in such an easy fashion for a good price, but big government and protectionism of old business and rackets is up against them.”

“So I think you're right, many of them are for freedom in the marketplace,” he continued. “They are fiscally conservative and much more conservative than the President. They don't neatly fit in any box. They're not neatly in the Republican box or the Democrat box. They may be more libertarian.”

Paul has received criticism as of late for the position he has taken on some issues, and Glenn ran through a series of current events to get the Senator’s thoughts.

Immigration

"I think what's going on down there illustrates the whole problem in a microcosm. It shows you why that if you want to vote for immigration reform, you have to secure the border first. You can't have sort of the granting of a beacon or a magnet or an amnesty or any kind of forgiveness without a secure border. That being said, if I felt like the border were secure and we did that, would I be for some kind of accommodation for those who want to work in our country and have been here for years and they want to be taxpayers and work for maybe some of these kids that were brought here? Yes, I can be for some form of forgiveness, but only after we have secured the border… If you secured your border, I think there are ways that we can try to figure out a humane solution to this, but it can't be without securing the border first.

[…]

[W]hat does it mean to secure the border? To secure the border means that when people are apprehended coming across the border, when they're apprehended in the process of a crime that if they're kids or whoever they are, we hold them in a humane fashion. But we hold them, we adjudicate it in a very expeditious way that they broke the law and that they're going home. And then we have a very big public display with the countries of returning them and the countries will cooperate or we shouldn't, frankly, trade with the country. So Guatemala, Ecuador, Honduras, Mexico, all these countries need to very visibly step and up say, ‘We will protect these kids. You will put these kids back into our care. We will protect these kids and find their parents and find their families and return them.’

But it needs to be one of these tough love kind of things that is 100% and done in a humane and compassionate way."

Israel

"The first thing I would do is absolutely say no money goes to Hamas and no foreign aid should ever get into the hands of Hamas. And I have legislation to do that. I would also say that there's a report out there now that the U.N. found missiles in schools in Gaza and made sure that they turned them back over to Hamas. What kind of international relief organization is turning missiles that they find in a school back over to Hamas? So I would make sure no money gets to Hamas, and I would make sure that Israel has an adequate defense to defend themselves. I'm a big supporter of the Iron Dome. In fact, I've gone one step further saying, you know what, maybe we need an Iron Dome in the United States as well.

[…]

[T]he other thing I wouldn't do is I wouldn't question what [Israel needs] to do to defend themselves because the decisions they have to make have to be based on living under a barrage of missiles on a day-to-day basis. So really, there are difficult decisions people make in war when someone attacks you. It's not our job to second-guess how they defend themselves. Can we be facilitators as far as trying to convene people if we can have influence on a cease-fire? Yes, but ultimately the decisions of what Israel decides is acceptable have to be made by Israel and those in Gaza."

Russia

"It looks there's a lot of evidence [the missile that took down Malaysia flight MH17 came from pro-Russia separatists]. The trajectory looks like it comes from the separatist controlled area. Most people are saying [the separatists] would have had to have some sophisticated training by the Russians to be able to do this. I'm sort of amazed because I don't see how you can be part of the civilized world and, you know, shoot a missile at a commercial airliner. And so I'm really amazed that Putin hasn't tried to distance himself from this.

The only way we can have an effect short of war – and I don't think war is the answer at this point – but short of [war] the only way we can have an effect is we need a unified European Union, NATO, and U.S. response to the Russians. And would that include sanctions? Yes. Would that include sanctions probably on the country of Russia? Yes. Would that involve trying to develop alternatives very quickly for Europe as far as natural gas and things like that? Yeah, and there's a lot the President could do to expedite that. Most of what this President has done has gotten in the way of exports, gotten in the way of the oil and gas industry. So there's a lot that we can do."

Without civic action, America faces collapse

JEFF KOWALSKY / Contributor | Getty Images

Every vote, jury duty, and act of engagement is civics in action, not theory. The republic survives only when citizens embrace responsibility.

I slept through high school civics class. I memorized the three branches of government, promptly forgot them, and never thought of that word again. Civics seemed abstract, disconnected from real life. And yet, it is critical to maintaining our republic.

Civics is not a class. It is a responsibility. A set of habits, disciplines, and values that make a country possible. Without it, no country survives.

We assume America will survive automatically, but every generation must learn to carry the weight of freedom.

Civics happens every time you speak freely, worship openly, question your government, serve on a jury, or cast a ballot. It’s not a theory or just another entry in a textbook. It’s action — the acts we perform every day to be a positive force in society.

Many of us recoil at “civic responsibility.” “I pay my taxes. I follow the law. I do my civic duty.” That’s not civics. That’s a scam, in my opinion.

Taking up the torch

The founders knew a republic could never run on autopilot. And yet, that’s exactly what we do now. We assume it will work, then complain when it doesn’t. Meanwhile, the people steering the country are driving it straight into a mountain — and they know it.

Our founders gave us tools: separation of powers, checks and balances, federalism, elections. But they also warned us: It won’t work unless we are educated, engaged, and moral.

Are we educated, engaged, and moral? Most Americans cannot even define a republic, never mind “keep one,” as Benjamin Franklin urged us to do after the Constitutional Convention.

We fought and died for the republic. Gaining it was the easy part. Keeping it is hard. And keeping it is done through civics.

Start small and local

In our homes, civics means teaching our children the Constitution, our history, and that liberty is not license — it is the space to do what is right. In our communities, civics means volunteering, showing up, knowing your sheriff, attending school board meetings, and understanding the laws you live under. When necessary, it means challenging them.

How involved are you in your local community? Most people would admit: not really.

Civics is learned in practice. And it starts small. Be honest in your business dealings. Speak respectfully in disagreement. Vote in every election, not just the presidential ones. Model citizenship for your children. Liberty is passed down by teaching and example.

Samuel Corum / Stringer | Getty Images

We assume America will survive automatically, but every generation must learn to carry the weight of freedom.

Start with yourself. Study the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and state laws. Study, act, serve, question, and teach. Only then can we hope to save the republic. The next election will not fix us. The nation will rise or fall based on how each of us lives civics every day.

Civics isn’t a class. It’s the way we protect freedom, empower our communities, and pass down liberty to the next generation.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

'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 critical difference: Rights from the Creator, not the state

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.