Glenn to Trump: 'Stop demonizing the companies and start fixing the problems'

August 25, 2015

WRITER

Donald Trump swore off Oreos over Nabisco's closure of a plant in Chicago, which will be moving to Mexico due to burdensome corporate taxes. Glenn took Trump to task over this comment, questioning how Trump is being touted as a Republican conservative.

He's acting more like a Republican progressive, Glenn argued, adding progressivism is a cancer that kills the Constitution.

"[Trump] says, 'I'm going to make us competitive.' How, when you're booing Nabisco for moving when we have the highest corporate tax rate? How, when you're implying that you should boycott Oreos because they're now in Mexico?" Glenn said.

Here's what Glenn said actually happens.

"If you stay in the United States, you become the Twinkies and you go out of business. And then, instead of having a company, like Ford still at least owns the company, instead, you go out of business and a Mexican company buys Twinkies. And then they make them there. They sell them here. And all of the money goes back to Mexico. Which do you prefer Mr. Constitutional conservative Donald Trump? Help me out," Glenn said.

Watch the segment below.

Below is a rush transcript for this segment, it might contain errors.

DONALD: You know, Mexico is the new China. The other day, Nabisco -- Oreos. Right? Oreos. I love Oreos. I'll never eat them again. Okay? I'll never eat them again.

No. Nabisco closes a plant they just announced a couple of days ago in Chicago, and they're moving the plant to Mexico. Now, why? Why? Why?

GLENN: Stop. Stop. Stop. Populist. Populist. Populist. What is he doing? Don't move to Mexico, the populist thing to say, and the crowd reacts.

Now, when I heard this clip over the weekend, I thought, wait a minute. Now, why is Nabisco moving? He immediately says, I'll never eat another Oreo again. I'll never eat another Oreo again. He goes on.

DONALD: Have you heard my story? My favorite story is Ford. You've heard the story with Ford? Do we want to hear it again or not? Yes! All right. I mean, that's a big one. So Ford, great company, they're building a $2.5 billion car factory in Mexico.

GLENN: Okay. He hates this. Let me just point out two things. First of all, Ford is the only one that didn't take a bailout from the United States government. So if you're not taking a bailout from the United States government, you have to make your company work.

Why is Ford moving to Mexico? Because they love Mexicans? Because they love Mexico so much? Or because they cannot afford to do business here in the United States? And that is the reason Nabisco moved. A constitutional conservative, a small government conservative, Ronald Reagan does not stand up there and say, I'm never going to eat another Oreo again. Ronald Reagan stands up and says, they moved their plant. They lost all those jobs. Why? Because they were chased out by the high corporate taxes. The highest -- and this is why Nabisco is moving. Because we have the highest corporate tax in the world. He doesn't say the rich should pay more. He says, we have the highest corporate tax in the world. And we're going to lose more companies. Nabisco, I'm president, you don't have to worry about moving and we don't have to worry about losing those jobs because I will make us competitive again. What does Donald Trump do? He becomes a populist and makes people boo Nabisco. Boo Oreos. At that rate, you'll lose every single company in America that counts because we have the highest corporate tax rates. Stop demonizing the companies and start fixing the problems to make us competitive again.

He says, I'm going to make us competitive. How, when you're booing Nabisco for moving when we have the highest corporate tax rate? How, when you're implying that you should boycott Oreos because they're now in Mexico? Here's what happens: If you stay in the United States, you become the Twinkie and you go out of business. And then, instead of having a company, like Ford still at least owns the company, instead, you go out of business and a Mexican company buys Twinkies. And then they make them there. They sell them here. And all of the money goes back to Mexico. Which do you prefer Mr. Constitutional conservative Donald Trump? Help me out. And I'd like to hear from his supporters. Help me out.

He loves government health care. These are all -- this isn't in the past. This is on the campaign trail. He loves Canadian health care. He says he's for a flat tax, but he wants the rich to pay more. He says that the reason why we had the stock market crash yesterday is because of poor planning. And boycott Oreos because they moved because of the highest corporate tax rate in the world. Help me out. Tell me exactly. How is this guy a Republican conservative? I'll tell you who he is. He is a Republican progressive.

You want more of the same stuff, except with attitude, in your face, a bully, then vote for Donald Trump. You want conservative principles, constitutional principles, lower taxes, lower corporate tax rates, freedom in insurance, you're not going to get it from a guy who says the Canadian thing is good. I'm sorry. But I don't understand it. Oh, and, by the way, Rupert Murdoch says that now that Trump is in, we should get another guy in. Another guy who is a great conservative -- one of the best mayors ever. Bloomberg. Because he's a Republican as well.

Progressive Republicans. Please. Don't let us have to spend the next four or eight years trying to teach the Republicans what you already know. Progressivism is a cancer that kills the Constitution. Now, do you need to have an up-close lesson that Republicans are the ones who started it? And I love these people who say, Glenn Beck is just fighting for the establishment. Are you out of your mind? Are you out of your mind?

'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 dangerous lie: Rights as government privileges, not God-given

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 America’s next generation trading freedom for equity?

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