Historic Cubs Win Achieves the Impossible: Glenn Talks Sports

November 03, 2016

Writer

The Chicago Cubs achieved the impossible. Okay, yeah, they ended their 108-year-old losing streak by winning the World Series, but more incredibly, they actually got Glenn Beck to talk about sports.

"Is Chicago the only city that has two baseball teams?" Glenn asked Thursday on his radio program.

Brilliant sports talk, no, but sports talk nonetheless.

"No, the Mets and the Yankees, perhaps," Co-host Stu Burguiere answered as gently as possible.

What fascinated Glenn most was the world of 1908.

"The Constitution still mattered. Taft was our president . . . a fat man," Glenn said.

Glenn later corrected that Roosevelt was still president in 1908, with Taft sworn into office in 1909. One thing's for sure, the times have certainly changed.

Read below or watch the clip for answers to these questions:

• Could a fat man (or woman) be elected today?

• Did New York ever have three teams?

• Did income tax exist in 1908?

• How did Glenn and Stu turn a baseball conversation into one about taxation?

• How old was Jeffy when the Cubs first won the World Series in 1908?

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

GLENN: Is Chicago the only city that has two baseball teams?

STU: No.

PAT: New York.

STU: The Mets and the Yankees perhaps.

GLENN: Good. Good. That's a question I could have answered.

STU: Yeah, you could have answered. Dodgers and Angels.

PAT: Sort of in the same city.

GLENN: Were they always like this because of the White Sox and the Cubs? Do they predate the two teams?

STU: I don't even understand this question.

GLENN: The Dodgers come from New York?

PAT: Yeah, they did. Yes, they did.

STU: We know that.

GLENN: So then did New York then have three teams?

PAT: No. They got the other --

GLENN: They got the Mets.

PAT: After the Dodgers.

GLENN: After the Dodgers. Right. Right. Stu.

STU: Well, yes. Did they have three at one point very early on?

JEFFY: They may have.

GLENN: Uh-huh. See. This is a question that maybe should be asked more often.

STU: Right. But you obviously couldn't answer it.

GLENN: Oh, yeah. I can. I can. I'm with you. I'm not sure if they had three at one time or not.

PAT: I'm pretty sure they didn't. But...

GLENN: So when was the last time the White Sox were in?

STU: The one in 2005, I think.

PAT: Yeah, they beat the Astros in 2005.

STU: But, I mean, the Cubs -- 1908. We went through the list of what had happened since, you know, the --

GLENN: The progressives weren't a thing yet, really.

STU: I mean, think about this -- it's incredible.

GLENN: The Constitution still mattered. Taft was our president.

(laughter)

A fat man.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Taft. When was the last time we had a fat man as president?

PAT: Taft. Taft.

GLENN: Right? I saw an ad for Taft. I saw a poster for Taft. And what was his first name?

JEFFY: William.

PAT: William Howard.

GLENN: Yeah. All it said underneath it was Bill. And it just had his -- it was like an illustration of him. Just his face. But they included his double chin.

And I thought to myself, "You couldn't reduce the double chin in the illustration? Nobody thought that was a good idea back then. Nobody was like -- he's a little fat. Can we make him a little thinner in the poster?" That was a good-looking man. It didn't matter. It didn't matter.

PAT: Yeah, it didn't matter.

GLENN: Boy, how far we have fallen. Or have we? Have we? Because look at the two candidates we have.

PAT: That's exactly right. I'd rather have a fat man. I'd rather have Chris Christie.

GLENN: I --

PAT: Over these two -- oh, my gosh, in a heartbeat.

JEFFY: Ooh.

GLENN: Yeah, I think I would.

PAT: In a heartbeat. I mean, I never thought I'd say I'd vote for Chris Christie --

GLENN: Between these two, I think I would.

PAT: Of these two --

STU: I mean, I still wouldn't vote for him. I would not vote for Chris Christie, although he would be a better president.

PAT: If he was up against Hillary Clinton, oh, I would.

STU: I wouldn't. I would never vote for Chris Christie.

GLENN: I think you could talk me into it. I think you could talk me into it.

PAT: I think I would have been talked into it by now.

GLENN: Yeah, I will tell you, the corruption stuff on her is just frightening.

JEFFY: Nothing on Chris Christie though.

GLENN: I know. I know, but Chris Christie is --

JEFFY: Yeah, but Chris has only got one state. Big deal.

GLENN: Yeah, he's totally corrupt as well. But she's just at a different level.

STU: This is 1908. Cubs win the World Series. Dow closes at 60.

PAT: Sixty. Wow.

STU: The Dow closed at 60.

PAT: Wow.

JEFFY: The Wright brothers -- it was five years after their first flight. The Model T.

PAT: So were you paying for your second bag on -- on Delta by then?

STU: No.

(laughter)

STU: The Model T had just come off the assembly line.

GLENN: But not really. They weren't really a success until like 1918, were they?

STU: I don't know.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: I'm just -- the world's tallest building. Of course, everyone remembers it, the Singer building, lower Manhattan. Forty-seven stories tall.

PAT: Gee.

STU: Forty-seven stories. Taft, of course, president, as we mentioned. Bette Davis, born.

GLENN: Born. Wow. She was old when I was five. Wow.

STU: Let's see.

JEFFY: Fox did a thing. Al Capone was nine. You know, things like that, that was doing.

STU: Yeah, yeah, Al Capone was 9.

JEFFY: Babe Ruth was 13.

STU: Babe Ruth was 13.

PAT: Jeez.

STU: They started -- in 1904, which was a few years before. They were in the middle -- it was when it started, but they were in the middle of building the Panama Canal. I mean, Jack Jackson was the heavyweight champion. Oh, May 10th, 1908, the first Mother's Day. That was at the Methodist church in West Virginia. I don't think it was national until later on.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: But it was the first one there. I mean, that's pretty incredible. I mean, that is a complete different world. 1908. That's a long freaking time.

[break]

GLENN: We have a correction here on a couple of things. You're right. '08 was the election. '09, Taft was in. Roosevelt was still president in '08.

STU: Right. And also correct that there were three teams in New York with the Giants.

GLENN: Right.

PAT: We knew that.

GLENN: Because the Giants --

PAT: The Giants.

STU: We always make fun of the fact that they call them -- still call them the New York football Giants.

PAT: There are no baseball Giants in New York. There's no need for that anymore.

STU: Right. But there was at one time.

PAT: There was at one time.

GLENN: There was. That's what I knew, and I was wondering why you guys were not bringing that up.

STU: Also, important questions that came in, including what -- how old was Jeffy when the Cubs first won the World Series in 1908.

PAT: That's a good question. How old were you then? Sixty-nine?

JEFFY: 1908 was the year?

STU: Yeah, do you remember?

GLENN: Back in aught eight.

PAT: The first aught eight.

JEFFY: It was somewhere after the first 50.

STU: Also, income tax did not exist in 1908.

GLENN: Yeah. Right.

STU: I mean, think about what a different country this is. The freaking income tax. It's still to this day -- and I know Glenn rails about the Progressive Era. You do that all the time, obviously, with real reason. But the idea that this country was able to pass a constitutional amendment to allow itself to be taxed, allow itself to have its money ripped off their own pockets is one of the most inexplicable things in history.

GLENN: No, it's not. No, it's not.

STU: Yes, it is.

GLENN: How did they do it?

STU: They lied, of course.

GLENN: About? What did they do?

STU: I mean --

GLENN: They pitted the rich against the poor.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: And they said it's the evil rich people. And it will only be them. It will never be over 5 percent.

STU: Or, ten. Right? I thought it was 10 percent.

GLENN: I thought it was five. Five or 10 percent.

STU: Whatever. It was very low.

GLENN: Five or 10 percent. It will never be over this low percentage, ever. And it will only be for the very wealth -- the wealthiest 1 percent. That was 1913. By 1919, the tax was 95 percent.

STU: It was 7 percent in 1913.

GLENN: Seven.

STU: And then by 1916, it was up to 15 percent. Then there was a slight rise in 1917, when it went from 15 to 67. There's a little bit of a bump there. Some people may have noticed it.

GLENN: Yeah, but that was only for the war, Stu.

STU: That only lasted one year to be fair. The next year was 73 percent.

GLENN: Right. But it was only for the war.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: And then that whole thing went back to 7 percent for just the wealthiest 1 percent.

STU: No. Never again.

GLENN: No, it's not.

STU: Never again. Never close. Yeah, weird.

GLENN: Really? Sounds like a lot.

Featured Image: A Chicago fan sits on top a street pole as people gather to watch the Chicago Cubs take on the Cleveland Indians in Cleveland in game seven of the 2016 World Series, outside Wrigley Field in Chicago, Illinois late on November 2, 2016. Ending America's longest sports title drought in dramatic fashion, the Chicago Cubs captured their first World Series since 1908 by defeating the Cleveland Indians 8-7 in a 10-inning thriller that concluded early on November 3. (Photo Credit: TASOS KATOPODIS/AFP/Getty Images)

The Woodrow Wilson Mother's Day loophole

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