Ok, how does Taylor Swift do all this amazing stuff for her fans?

July 09, 2015

WRITER

Every other day there’s a story about Taylor Swift doing something for a fan. She’s delivery gifts, singing in hospitals, or - in the latest case - donate $50,000 to a fan with leukemia! How does this happen?

Stu and Pat have the story and reaction on Thursday’s radio show. Listen at 1 hour into today's podcast:

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it may contain errors:

PAT: It's Pat and Stu. 877-727-BECK. 877-727-BECK. I'm starting to wonder if Taylor Swift is even human.

STU: That's an interesting question. Do we have enough time to debate that before the end of the program?

PAT: I don't think so. I'm pretty sure she's not even human.

STU: Why do you believe that?

PAT: Look at all the stuff she does. All the good works she does. It's not natural. Okay. Stop it.

STU: It's also not just her. I'm sure she has a team of 20 people just monitoring social media just for these opportunities.

PAT: You think so? So she set up like a team --

STU: She is a brand. I mean, she's a business. She does it right. She knows what she's doing. She's very smart.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: That's not to say -- I think she really does post on Instagram and post on, you know, Facebook and Twitter. But, you know, she's got people.

PAT: She's everywhere.

STU: Yeah, she has people that says this is a good opportunity. Do this one.

PAT: Every time I look, like almost every day, she's driving to somebody's house to drop off gift and money. Then she's off to some hospital to drop off gifts and money. Then she does this thing with the 11-year-old girl in Arizona who had leukemia, and she was diagnosed in late June with an aggressive form of leukemia under orders from her doctors, she was not allowed to leave the hospital. So it forced her to miss Taylor Swift's concert in Phoenix. She was bummed about that. She talked about it online. After she was diagnosed, she put online some video where she chose Taylor Swift's song Bad Blood. I don't know it.

STU: Yeah, it's a big, big hit.

PAT: It's her fight song when she battles cancer. So Taylor Swift or one of her people saw that. And just two days after in fact it was posted, she donated $50,000 to Oakes' online funding campaign. $50,000. And said, to the beautiful and brave Naomi, I'm sorry. You have to miss it. But there will always be more concerts. Let's focus on getting you feeling better. I'm sending you the biggest hugs to you and your family.

STU: She's a little too perfect. I think it was your point.

PAT: She's absolutely perfect.

STU: I mean, look, she's doing a great job.

PAT: Jeez.

STU: And is it really nice? Yes, it really is.

PAT: I'm sick of it. Okay. Stop it with your good works.

STU: That's not where I was going. I think she should continue to do this.

PAT: Stop your good works. You're making the rest of us look bad. Now stop it. I'm getting pissed. Stop it.

STU: Yeah, but is it worth the $50,000 in just advertising? I mean, to put it in a really plain capitalist business sense, man, she looks unbelievable. She will actually -- she will be the face of every product from now until the end of time.

PAT: But you're looking at this in a really cynical way as I am so we're destroying another cool thing. Another really, really good -- a really feel-good story. And we're destroying it with cynicism.

STU: I'm disagreeing. It's not cynical. It's showing that capitalism is good. You know, here she is. She's doing good things with her money, and it winds up paying off. It winds up furthering her career, and it winds up helping others. There's nothing wrong with that. There's nothing cynical about that. It's great. I'm really -- I'm happy when you see people like this.

PAT: It's great. She's phenomenal though.

STU: Yeah, she really is.

PAT: No matter how she's finding all this stuff and doing all this stuff, it's -- it's an amazing -- it's an amazing effort. And she doesn't have to do any of it. You know, there are 99.9 percent of all artists don't.

STU: Well, that's the thing. She had to make the decision to put 12 people on to monitor social media all the time.

PAT: Right. Because it meant something to her.

STU: It means something to her. She wants to do something that is good. No person physically can catch every single person that misses a concert and has an illness. Look, she's able to do this. She does this weekly, at least. It might be twice a week.

PAT: I think so, yeah.

STU: And every time she does it, she gets glowing media attention, and, you know what, deservedly so. She's doing something good with her money. Thank God. That's great.

PAT: Yeah. She's amazing.

STU: I can't necessarily take her surprise at awards shows anymore. That I can't deal with. You win every award, Taylor. Stop being shocked. I can't take that. But outside of that, she's pretty much the perfect person.

PAT: Is she winning pop awards now? Because she left country.

STU: She wins everything.

PAT: So she won all the country awards. She came over to pop music. And now she's winning awards on those shows too.

STU: Oh, yeah. She's winning everything. And the funny thing, people who used to abandon country for pop used to get wrecked for it.

PAT: Oh, yeah, sellouts.

STU: She absolutely -- this is her biggest CD of all time, of her entire career.

PAT: Is it really?

STU: Oh, yeah, this thing is huge. It's literally saving the music industry. It's the only thing doing anything.

PAT: Well, she was the first artist I think -- we just had the story a while ago. She was the first artist to have three straight multi-platinum records.

STU: It was something like that, I can't remember exactly what it was. It was hard to believe.

PAT: Or maybe it was that she was the first -- the first female artist to have a million plus in the first week. That's what it was.

STU: Three consecutive releases.

PAT: For three consecutive releases, she sold over a million copies. And the thing is, nobody does that anymore.

STU: No, it's not the same.

PAT: The music industry has been decimated by i Tunes. So it's almost over for these artists. Scant few of them are making any money anymore.

STU: Yeah. It's sort of the reverse of the NFL quarterback. Which, back in the day, getting someone over 3,000 yards was a major achievement. Now, multiple people are doing 5,000 yards a year. So the new quarterback records aren't maybe as impressive because all the NFL systems have changed. The reverse is happening with music.

Nobody is selling records like that anymore. Nobody is selling CDs like that anymore. Even with all the downloads and the digital stuff, it doesn't happen anymore. She's still able to do it. Not to mention tours and endorsements and everything else. I mean, it's pretty freaking amazing.

PAT: So she should be able to command whatever she wants to get from her record company when she signs her next deal because she's the only artist that is really keeping everybody afloat right now.

STU: Yeah. And she's done it in a way -- she hasn't, you know, taken her clothes off. And done it in that way.

PAT: No, she's classy. She's a class act.

STU: Yeah. She didn't Miley Cyrus it.

PAT: Thank you. Thank you for that. I'm so glad about that. She does get wrecked for having brief relationships, I guess. When they go wrong. But she gets a lot of songs out of it. So...

STU: She does. Well, that was the situation she had -- look, I don't know. Maybe this isn't a conversation that this audience finds mega relevant. I don't know. But when you talk about a person who is using capitalism to help other people, it's actually a great example of what should be happening.

PAT: Yeah, it is.

STU: And to the point of, not only that, but there's also there's that part of entertainment that obviously goes down the Miley Cyrus road. You get praised for that. I think you flame out a lot faster when you go down that direction. But Taylor Swift had a situation where she released photos of herself in a bikini, which was kind of a big deal at the time because she hadn't done that stuff. The only reason she did it is she apparently got caught in the bikini by paparazzi and she just wanted to beat them to the punch. She knew these pictures were coming out anyway, so she released them on her own. Every single decision she makes seems to work out.

PAT: So savvy. I don't know if it's her or she has some tremendous manager.

STU: Got to be both.

PAT: Wow.

STU: She has to have a great team around her as well. Although, I will say the last time I talked this glowingly about a celebrity was probably Tiger Woods and that didn't work out so well.

Featured Image: DUBLIN, IRELAND - JUNE 29: Taylor Swift brings The 1989 World Tour to 3Arena on June 29, 2015 in Dublin, Ireland. (Photo by Carrie Davenport/Getty Images for TAS)

'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