Obama to teachers: If you want to indoctrinate your students, try this!

May 29, 2015

WRITER

President Obama held a Twitter Q&A this week when someone just happened to ask how to teach students about climate change. President Obama's answer? Just "weave" climate change it into science and social studies, because kids care about animals and understand the importance of the environment. Doesn't that sound like a lesson in Indoctrination 101?

.@arianastover Kids instinctively understand importance of environment, impact on animals, health. Weave it into science and social studies
— President Obama (@POTUS) May 28, 2015

A rough transcript of the segment is below:

PAT: It takes up the road. Yeah. So speaking of the climate change, President Obama yesterday suggested that teachers, because he was having this little Twitter thing with educators, and so he suggested --

JEFFY: That's good for him. He just started that Twitter account @POTUS. So he's good to go.

PAT: So he suggested to teachers that they weave climate change into their science social studies. He was at the National Hurricane Center in Miami, and one question posed to him was: How do you suggest teachers approach discussing climate change in a classroom setting?

JEFFY: That just came in like that?

PAT: Yeah, just came in. Just someone wondering: How do you suggest that teachers approach discussing climate change, not, hey, Mr. Obama, how come there's been 18 years without global warming and you keep saying it's worse than it's ever been predicted to be? Not that. Okay. That wasn't the question. So he replied. Kids instinctively understand the importance of the environment impact on animal's health. Weave it into science and social studies.

JEFFY: See.

PAT: I can't take it? The indoctrination -- well, kids understand the importance -- no, they don't. Kids instinctively believe what you tell them to believe.

JEFFY: Yes.

PAT: So if you start weaving it into your science discussion and in social studies -- it doesn't belong in either of those discussions at all.

JEFFY: Pretty sure there already are weaving it in, as it is.

PAT: Oh, and they have been.

JEFFY: Yes.

PAT: I've talked about this many times probably. But we home-schooled our kids through their entire school process, except for our first two. Our two oldest, we gave with them the option of going to high school once they got to that point, thinking, okay, now they have that foundation and then they can deal with whatever comes at them. And they wanted to be involved in extracurricular things like football and cheerleading and all that stuff, so we let them go to high school.

Well, those four years of indoctrination undid everything we ever taught them.

JEFFY: Last a lifetime.

PAT: Yeah, my daughter was absolutely all over climate change. All over it, just from those four years. Just, it's in it, and it has been for a long time. They've been teaching this stuff for a long time. It's no surprise he's telling the teachers to weave it into science and social studies. It just drives me out of my mind because we haven't had any global warming in 18 years.

JEFFY: I know this is a little off topic because of things like this is because you started your own school. I was reading an article about Elon Musk who was sending his kids to school in probably some kind of other private school. I don't remember what school he was sending them to. He couldn't take what they were learning, and he just created a school. These kids, we have to teach them how to think.

PAT: Wow.

JEFFY: So you're not alone, Pat.

PAT: Wow. That's a pretty good company, Elon Musk. I bet he has a little extra money to fund his school. Just a tad more probably than we do.

JEFFY: It's possible. It's possible that Elon might have some extra bucks than you.

PAT: He might have nicer desks, chairs, computers, that kind of thing.

JEFFY: Maybe.

PAT: The guy has unlimited money. That's pretty cool.

JEFFY: Maybe he has better valet service than you to get the kids in.

PAT: I think we have more with Elon Musk than he would probably --

JEFFY: I think that's true.

PAT: He's a smart guy. Also, there's this new UK study, as Obama is telling teachers to weave climate change into the curriculum of science and social studies and indoctrinate our kids who, by the way, will believe whatever they're told. You tell them there's climate change and it's killing the planet. Of course, you'll scare the hell out of them. Of course, you're going to scare them. And, of course, they'll go to their parents and say, we have to be better to the climate. We can't have an SUV. We can't turn on our electricity. We should probably turn it off. And we should probably live like the Amish. And we should probably protect the animals. Of course, you could do that to them. They don't instinctively know about the environment. Shut up. It's madness. We have this new UK study that's predicting decades of global cooling. New study from United Kingdom predicts the earth is about to go through a major climactic shift that could mean decades of cooler temperatures and fewer hurricanes in the United States. Well, we're already seeing that. We've seen that for ten years. Scientists at the University of South Hampton predict that a cooling of the Atlantic Ocean could cool global temperatures a half degree Celsius.

So what is that? Like a degree and a half Fahrenheit? Something like that. And may offer a brief respite from the persistent rise of global temperatures. This cooling phase in the Atlantic will influence temperature, rainfall, drought, and even the frequency of hurricanes in many regions of the world, they said.

The study's authors base their results on the ocean sensor arrays and a 100 years of sea level data. Sea surface temperatures in the Atlantic vary between warm and cold over time scales of many decades. This decadal variability called the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, or the AMO -- how often have we spoken of the AMO?

JEFFY: Oh, my gosh. We were just talking about it.

PAT: We were just talking about the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation.

JEFFY: Well, I mean, the AMO.

PAT: The AMO. It's a notable feature of the Atlantic Ocean and the climate of the regions it influences. So what they're saying is that this will result in cooler surface water, which will result in cooler air temperatures for -- for the planet. And it could last 20 to 30 years.

This means that the pattern could -- as they admit in the article, it could extend the already so-called pause in global warming. For years, scientists have been debating why satellite temperature data shows there have been about 18 years with no warming. Surface temperature data, as I mentioned a few minutes ago, shows a similar pause in warming for the last ten to 15 years. So far the dominant explanation of why that's been, is that the oceans have absorbed a lot of the heat that would have otherwise gone into the atmosphere.

JEFFY: Yeah. But if that doesn't happen, Pat, if that doesn't happen --

PAT: Yes.

JEFFY: Then...

PAT: Can we say?

JEFFY: I believe some forecasters have told us what will happen. Because it's frightening to think about.

PAT: Here's what would have happened if this hadn't occurred.

VOICE: Carbon emissions also trap heat. Today's report shows oceans have absorbed 90 percent of that heat, raising ocean temperatures by half a degree. Had all that heat gone into the atmosphere, air temperatures could have risen by more than 200 degrees.

PAT: You don't want that. You don't want it.

JEFFY: See. Oh, my God. We could be melted.

PAT: So, again, Jeffy, if the earth didn't work the way it does, it would be 284 degrees today in Dallas, Texas. 284 degrees!

JEFFY: We need to do something about that.

PAT: Fortunately, it's not.

JEFFY: We still need to do something about it because it could be.

PAT: That's what they believe. Isn't that bizarre. You're so stupid you didn't know how the earth worked in the first place, so you thought all this warming went directly into the air.

President oceans absorbed none of it. You're a scientist. You didn't know that. But we're supposed to believe everything else you say about global warming.

JEFFY: Everything else. Everything else.

PAT: Okay. All right. I got you. Just doesn't make any sense. Does it?

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.

Glenn's Show Prep