Have we lost our freedoms?

December 03, 2014

The Glenn Beck Program

Glenn was joined by Judge Andrew Napolitano last night to discuss his new book, Suicide Pact: The Radical Expansion of Presidential Powers and the Lethal Threat of American Liberty. Napolitano's book argues that the greatest trick the federal government has ever pulled was in convincing us, U.S. citizens, to voluntarily surrender our liberties. Watch as Napolitano and Glenn discuss examples in history where the government has stepped in and tried to remove Americans freedom, and mostly succeeding.

Glenn: Okay, new book out, "Suicide Pact: The Radical Expansion of Presidential Powers and the Lethal Threat of American Liberty". Judge Andrew Napolitano is the guy who is a good friend of ours. A lot of people would like him to run for president. I would like to see Ted Cruz be president, and maybe we have a new Chief Justice. I’m just saying. I’m just saying. How are you doing, Judge?

Judge: I am well, Glenn. What a fabulous, fabulous opening segment. It made me pine for those days where I was sort of seated behind the cameras in that FOX studio watching you do that five days a week.

Glenn: Thank you.

Judge: Great, my man.

Glenn: So judge, do I have it wrong anyplace on the part—I think Americans are not revolutionaries? I think that we don’t like hatred. We don’t like any of this stuff; however, the government, both left and right—as you know, progressive started with Theodore Roosevelt—both left and right, they will seize power.

And your book talks about George W. Bush and Barack Obama. And once a few of us get out of our own skin a little bit and say hey, wait a minute, maybe I made a mistake on George W. Bush, we do see the point that the left was making, but the left hasn’t seen the point we’re making now. But it’s this game back and forth. They’re both doing it.

Judge: The first half of the book is a history of presidential lawmaking and law breaking from George Washington to Bill Clinton, and of course it touches on the hot button issues, the Alien and Sedition Acts, the progressive era, Woodrow Wilson arresting people for singing songs in German, arresting people for reciting the Declaration of Independence in front of draft offices.

The second half of the book really focuses on George W. Bush and Barack Obama, who basically took the unpunished behavior of their predecessors when they broke the law and violated the Constitution and used it to their own political purposes. I recount a scene in which the FBI was known in the Bush years to show up at post offices and intimidate postal inspectors. These are post office cops with uniforms and guns and badges, into forking over mail so that the FBI could look at the mail, put a marker in it, close the mail up, and send it on its way.

A Republican Congress enacted legislation saying you can’t break into the mail. You want to get into the mail, go to a judge, present probable cause, and get a search warrant—very fine, consistent with the Constitution, except that when George Bush signed this legislation into existence, as the ink was falling from the pen in his fingers, he raised his eyes and looked at the camera and said I have no intention of enforcing this law. You know what, we have seen that attitude magnified today to gargantuan proportions under Barack Obama.

Glenn: I will tell you, Judge, I am concerned about this president as I have been. I was concerned about the last president. I am more concerned about this one, but I have to tell you, I’m five times more concerned about the next one, because I don’t think that you can keep this money game going for very long. And when the people become hungry, we do take to the streets, and then all bets are off. Whoever’s in office has an opportunity to become absolutely a nightmare.

Judge: Here is where in my view you were right on the mark with the pendulum swinging left and right and freedom being at the heart, being at the fulcrum which never moves. And here’s the problem with leadership in the Republican and Democratic parties today.

On the three transcendental issues of our era, the Republicans and the Democrats, the leadership of the parties, all agree. They agree that our freedoms do not come from God or from our humanity, they come from the government. They also agree that we should be in a state of perpetual war, because war is the health of the state and perpetual debt because we don’t dare want to pay our bills today when we can push them off until tomorrow.

Unless and until a force in the government comes along, whether it’s Rand Paul or Ted Cruz, to break that cycle, freedom comes from our humanity, which is a gift from God, perpetual war will destroy us, and perpetual debt will destroy us. We will continue to go down and down and down.

Do you know that the government’s debt silently broke 18 trillion over the Thanksgiving weekend? Did you see that on the front page of the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times?

Glenn: We talked about it, but I know that it wasn’t talked about. It’s 70% increase in the last six years, 70%. I don’t care who did it. It was unpatriotic and un-American when this guy was running, and now a 70% increase.

Judge: It was done by a Democratic president and a Democratic Senate and a Republican House of Representatives, most of whose members condemned the concept of debt but then voted to let the president borrow all the money he wants.

Glenn: So Judge, let me take you here to a couple of recent things that are gravely concerning to me. One, the president said, what was it, yesterday or the day before, that he is going to sign an executive order, and he’s going to decide, he’s going to oversee this civilian military force that we’re building. I have no problems with cops. I am friends with a lot of cops. I love cops; however, we should not be militarizing our cops, and the president should not oversee which departments get militarized and which don’t get militarized. This is craziness.

Judge: The over militarization of the police which occurred in the last 12 years under the administrations of George W. Bush and Barack Obama, when the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, and Justice gave used military equipment to local police departments, brings us dangerously close to a police state. The definition of a police state, when the government’s prime concern is for its own safety, not for the lives, liberty, and property of the people it has sworn to protect. That’s a very, very dangerous place in which to be.

This president using Ferguson as an excuse sounded yesterday, with Al Sharpton seated just two people away from him, like he wants to federalize the police, like he wants to tell every police department from New York City to Ferguson, from Dallas to Los Angeles, from Sussex County, New Jersey to Omaha, Nebraska, how they should protect our lives, liberty, and property. We should say to the president stay home. Leave us alone.

Glenn: Well, a lot of people have said that, but he doesn’t listen. So when we come back, you know, your book outlines what Woodrow Wilson did, what FDR did, and quite honestly, Judge, I don’t think we’re beyond that ourselves. You know, you throw somebody for speaking German into jail, I mean, there were concentration camps in America in World War I. There were obviously in World War II with Italians and with Japanese. We don’t like to talk about them, but that’s what they are. We call them internment camps. They were concentration camps, period, and it was a gross violation of our Constitution.

I don’t think that we’re beyond that. How do we get people to see the errors of their ways, Judge, when quite honestly—and I need to take a break—when quite honestly nobody is interested? Nobody seems interested in this because they don’t believe bad things could actually happen.

'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.

POLL: Is Gen Z’s anger over housing driving them toward socialism?

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