Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
Shop
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Trump Achieves the Impossible: Stu Defends Douche Hall of Famer Chris Cuomo

February 09, 2017
Staff

WRITER

Say what you will about President Donald J. Trump, but there's not going to be one dull moment over the next four years.

In one of his latest tweets, the president scolded CNN's Chris Cuomo, a member of the Douche Hall of Fame, over his interview with Sen. Blumenthal (D-CT):

There's only one problem: Cuomo did ask the question.

"I listened to the interview with Chris Cuomo and Senator Blumenthal. It was legitimately the first question he asked him was about his military service," Co-host Stu Burguiere said on radio Thursday.

Perhaps President Trump tuned in late to the interview and missed the lead question.

"Defending Chris Cuomo is physically painful for me. It actually hurts. Ligaments are pulled and organs shut down," Stu said.

"This guy is a douche. There's no doubt about that," Co-host Pat Gray chimed in.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

PAT: I mean, say what you will about Donald J. Trump, and we have. We've said plenty about him, both good and bad actually, but there's not going to be one dull moment over the next four years

STU: That's so true.

PAT: This guy tweeting random stuff at 3 o'clock in the morning every day, there's not going to be -- there's not going to be a lack of things to talk about.

STU: What was the tweet this morning, Jeffy, about the CNN interview?

JEFFY: One hour ago, Chris Cuomo, in his interview with Senator Blumenthal never asked him about his long-term lie about his brave service in Vietnam. Fake news.

STU: Now, this sadly is douche-on-douche violence.

JEFFY: I know.

STU: Being both Chris Cuomo and Donald Trump.

JEFFY: It's tough to stand up for them.

STU: But here's the thing, I listened to the interview with Chris Cuomo and Senator Blumenthal. It was legitimately the first question he asked him was about his military service.

PAT: Seriously.

JEFFY: Wow.

PAT: Not only he asked him, it was the first question he asked.

STU: Now, maybe Trump tuned in, in the middle and missed it or whatever.

PAT: Still come on, you don't check a single fact before you start tweeting?

STU: Look, I --

PAT: Oh, jeez.

STU: I don't know what to say about it. It's obviously completely unimportant as far as the future of the country. I don't know why Trump does this. I mean, Trump wins with his entire audience, right?

JEFFY: He sure does.

STU: If you didn't see the interview, you just believe, oh, man, Cuomo is avoiding that question.

PAT: Yes.

STU: Legitimately his first question was, a lot of people are saying that, you know, why should they trust you on this Gorsuch thing? You lied about your military service.

That was like -- and, of course, Blumenthal ducked the question, which, of course, he would do. And you might be able to fairly say, as even Chris Cuomo mentioned, you can fairly criticize him potentially for not following him on it or not going after him and chasing him down and trying -- but you can't say he didn't say it.

PAT: But you can't say he didn't ask.

STU: It was the first thing he said. So I don't know what the purpose of that is. I think maybe it's one of those things where you can make the media out to be sort of unbelievable and, you know, that they're making stuff up and they don't care about getting to the truth. Which is true so often, there is no need to make one up on Twitter.

PAT: That's right.

STU: You can find 30 examples a day where CNN does something distasteful to conservatives or it doesn't seem like they're actually looking for the truth on a particular story. But when you pick one where the guy legitimately -- I -- you know, defending Chris Cuomo is physically painful for me. It actually hurts. Ligaments are pulled and organs shut down.

PAT: This guy is a douche. There's no doubt about that.

STU: But why pick that one? I don't know.

PAT: I don't either.

STU: However, I think he does well with this stuff because strategically -- just talking specifically, I think it helps feed that narrative that the media doesn't do their job. And most people aren't going to check. Who is going to check that? Nobody.

PAT: Nobody. The other thing he was tweeting about was Nordstrom. Right?

STU: Yeah, that was a big thing.

PAT: He was upset with Nordstrom because apparently they dropped Ivanka's line from their stores. And I wonder, was it performing badly as Nordstrom had said or was it because of the immigration policy?

STU: Right.

JEFFY: It was because they treated her unfairly according to President Trump.

PAT: According to Trump.

STU: And whether you think that is unfair or not, that's another story. But I think it was legitimately connected to the immigration thing. They came out with a statement basically saying they disagreed with it. And then a couple days later, they just dropped the line. Come on.

PAT: That sounds a little more than coincidence, doesn't it?

JEFFY: Yes, it does.

STU: I doubt they were like, "Well, I just don't like the design on that shirt. I just don't like it. I'm not a paisley guy."

PAT: I liked it last week, but this week, I don't like it anymore.

STU: Wow. That is ugly. I don't like the color red anymore. I just don't like it. So I doubt that was it. It was one of those things that probably was tied. That's, of course, their right as a private company.

PAT: Yeah, it is. It is.

STU: I don't know if that's -- you can certainly be critical of the president for getting involved in that nonsense, from a perspective of, he's got more important things to do than his daughter's -- I mean, it's my daughter's birthday today. Happy birthday, Ainsley.

PAT: And it's your birthday today. Happy birthday, Stu.

STU: Thank you very much. But as much as you love your daughter, talking about her clothing line as president of the United States is probably not -- should not be --

PAT: Does Ainsley have -- your daughter, does she have a clothing line yet?

STU: She does. She does.

PAT: She does? Okay.

STU: It's only at Neiman though. So go to Neiman Marcus, you can pick that up. The Ainsley line.

PAT: Nice.

STU: Yeah, a lot of Elsa. Which we did not get the licensing rights for, so fingers crossed they don't hear this.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: But a lot of Else going on in that clothing line.

So I don't -- I don't like the idea that he's criticizing private companies. I didn't like it when Barack Obama would do it. I don't think that's the role for the president. It certainly brings up conflict of interest stuff, which is unnecessary for him to have to deal with in the middle of trying to have to deal with many things -- as we have said on the show -- many things that have been good so far. So why put yourself in that position? I just don't know -- I wonder if President Trump has decided I'm going to every day come out with something that's going to make the media go crazy and have them all distracted. And I will do the opposite.

That's sort of that idea of the master media manipulator that everybody has kind of thrown out there. And if it's true, it does seem to work.

Sometimes -- I don't like how it's done, but it does seem to be an effective tool.

PAT: And if it does work and it gets him through his presidency and helps make him successful, it will be interesting to see if that forever changes the way the office of the presidency is used.

JEFFY: The way it's done, yeah.

PAT: Because people will see that -- the next guy is going to see that -- or girl. The next guy or woman will see, "Well, what Trump worked, so I'm going to try it too." And maybe they'll just use the office that way.

He's setting a precedent here. And if it works, I think it will be used in the future.

STU: Yeah. I mean, I think so.

And you could adjust the way it's done and make -- it's certainly a tool that is useful.

PAT: Uh-huh.

STU: And you're even seeing -- I mean, Elizabeth Warren is doing the same thing. I'm going to resist -- you're going to resist the guy you've been working with for the past six years, really? Jeff Sessions is the thing you're going to resist? The guy you probably had lunch with 12 times over the past four years. That's going to be a big resistance movement? It's obviously nonsense.

But these people go to social media. They go in front of the cameras. They try to get these things going. And it probably does work. And I think because most people have lies. Right? They're not in the middle of this. No one is watching Chris Cuomo in the morning, checking whether he said these things. No one is thinking whether Jeff Sessions or Elizabeth Warren were having coffee last week and joking about how this was all going to happen. We were all going to have these little arguments, and at the end, it's all going to go through. You know, it's silly. But for whatever reason, the American people, especially those that aren't engaged in the process, they eat it up.

Grim warning: Bad-faith Israel critics duck REAL questions

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Bad-faith attacks on Israel and AIPAC warp every debate. Real answers emerge only when people set aside scripts and ask what serves America’s long-term interests.

The search for truth has always required something very much in short supply these days: honesty. Not performative questions, not scripted outrage, not whatever happens to be trending on TikTok, but real curiosity.

Some issues, often focused on foreign aid, AIPAC, or Israel, have become hotbeds of debate and disagreement. Before we jump into those debates, however, we must return to a simpler, more important issue: honest questioning. Without it, nothing in these debates matters.

Ask questions because you want the truth, not because you want a target.

The phrase “just asking questions” has re-entered the zeitgeist, and that’s fine. We should always question power. But too many of those questions feel preloaded with someone else’s answer. If the goal is truth, then the questions should come from a sincere desire to understand, not from a hunt for a villain.

Honest desire for truth is the only foundation that can support a real conversation about these issues.

Truth-seeking is real work

Right now, plenty of people are not seeking the truth at all. They are repeating something they heard from a politician on cable news or from a stranger on TikTok who has never opened a history book. That is not a search for answers. That is simply outsourcing your own thought.

If you want the truth, you need to work for it. You cannot treat the world like a Marvel movie where the good guy appears in a cape and the villain hisses on command. Real life does not give you a neat script with the moral wrapped up in two hours.

But that is how people are approaching politics now. They want the oppressed and the oppressor, the heroic underdog and the cartoon villain. They embrace this fantastical framing because it is easier than wrestling with reality.

This framing took root in the 1960s when the left rebuilt its worldview around colonizers and the colonized. Overnight, Zionism was recast as imperialism. Suddenly, every conflict had to fit the same script. Today’s young activists are just recycling the same narrative with updated graphics. Everything becomes a morality play. No nuance, no context, just the comforting clarity of heroes and villains.

Bad-faith questions

This same mindset is fueling the sudden obsession with Israel, and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in particular. You hear it from members of Congress and activists alike: AIPAC pulls the strings, AIPAC controls the government, AIPAC should register as a foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. The questions are dramatic, but are they being asked in good faith?

FARA is clear. The standard is whether an individual or group acts under the direction or control of a foreign government. AIPAC simply does not qualify.

Here is a detail conveniently left out of these arguments: Dozens of domestic organizations — Armenian, Cuban, Irish, Turkish — lobby Congress on behalf of other countries. None of them registers under FARA because — like AIPAC — they are independent, domestic organizations.

If someone has a sincere problem with the structure of foreign lobbying, fair enough. Let us have that conversation. But singling out AIPAC alone is not a search for truth. It is bias dressed up as bravery.

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

If someone wants to question foreign aid to Israel, fine. Let’s have that debate. But let’s ask the right questions. The issue is not the size of the package but whether the aid advances our interests. What does the United States gain? Does the investment strengthen our position in the region? How does it compare to what we give other nations? And do we examine those countries with the same intensity?

The real target

These questions reflect good-faith scrutiny. But narrowing the entire argument to one country or one dollar amount misses the larger problem. If someone objects to the way America handles foreign aid, the target is not Israel. The target is the system itself — an entrenched bureaucracy, poor transparency, and decades-old commitments that have never been re-examined. Those problems run through programs around the world.

If you want answers, you need to broaden the lens. You have to be willing to put aside the movie script and confront reality. You have to hold yourself to a simple rule: Ask questions because you want the truth, not because you want a target.

That is the only way this country ever gets clarity on foreign aid, influence, alliances, and our place in the world. Questioning is not just allowed. It is essential. But only if it is honest.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

A nation unravels when its shared culture is the first thing to go

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Texas now hosts Quran-first academies, Sharia-compliant housing schemes, and rapidly multiplying mosques — all part of a movement building a self-contained society apart from the country around it.

It is time to talk honestly about what is happening inside America’s rapidly growing Muslim communities. In city after city, large pockets of newcomers are choosing to build insulated enclaves rather than enter the broader American culture.

That trend is accelerating, and the longer we ignore it, the harder it becomes to address.

As Texas goes, so goes America. And as America goes, so goes the free world.

America has always welcomed people of every faith and people from every corner of the world, but the deal has never changed: You come here and you join the American family. You are free to honor your traditions, keep your faith, but you must embrace the Constitution as the supreme law of the land. You melt into the shared culture that allows all of us to live side by side.

Across the country, this bargain is being rejected by Islamist communities that insist on building a parallel society with its own rules, its own boundaries, and its own vision for how life should be lived.

Texas illustrates the trend. The state now has roughly 330 mosques. At least 48 of them were built in just the last 24 months. The Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex alone has around 200 Islamic centers. Houston has another hundred or so. Many of these communities have no interest in blending into American life.

This is not the same as past waves of immigration. Irish, Italian, Korean, Mexican, and every other group arrived with pride in their heritage. Still, they also raised American flags and wanted their children to be part of the country’s future. They became doctors, small-business owners, teachers, and soldiers. They wanted to be Americans.

What we are watching now is not the melting pot. It is isolation by design.

Parallel societies do not end well

More than 300 fundamentalist Islamic schools now operate full-time across the country. Many use Quran-first curricula that require students to spend hours memorizing religious texts before they ever reach math or science. In Dallas, Brighter Horizons Academy enrolls more than 1,700 students and draws federal support while operating on a social model that keeps children culturally isolated.

Then there is the Epic City project in Collin and Hunt counties — 402 acres originally designated only for Muslim buyers, with Sharia-compliant financing and a mega-mosque at the center. After public outcry and state investigations, the developers renamed it “The Meadows,” but a new sign does not erase the original intent. It is not a neighborhood. It is a parallel society.

Americans should not hesitate to say that parallel societies are dangerous. Europe tried this experiment, and the results could not be clearer. In Germany, France, and the United Kingdom, entire neighborhoods now operate under their own cultural rules, some openly hostile to Western norms. When citizens speak up, they are branded bigots for asserting a basic right: the ability to live safely in their own communities.

A crisis of confidence

While this separation widens, another crisis is unfolding at home. A recent Gallup survey shows that about 40% of American women ages 18 to 39 would leave the country permanently if given the chance. Nearly half of a rising generation — daughters, sisters, soon-to-be mothers — no longer believe this nation is worth building a future in.

And who shapes the worldview of young boys? Their mothers. If a mother no longer believes America is home, why would her child grow up ready to defend it?

As Texas goes, so goes America. And as America goes, so goes the free world. If we lose confidence in our own national identity at the same time that we allow separatist enclaves to spread unchecked, the outcome is predictable. Europe is already showing us what comes next: cultural fracture, political radicalization, and the slow death of national unity.

Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

Stand up and tell the truth

America welcomes Muslims. America defends their right to worship freely. A Muslim who loves the Constitution, respects the rule of law, and wants to raise a family in peace is more than welcome in America.

But an Islamist movement that rejects assimilation, builds enclaves governed by its own religious framework, and treats American law as optional is not simply another participant in our melting pot. It is a direct challenge to it. If we refuse to call this problem out out of fear of being called names, we will bear the consequences.

Europe is already feeling those consequences — rising conflict and a political class too paralyzed to admit the obvious. When people feel their culture, safety, and freedoms slipping away, they will follow anyone who promises to defend them. History has shown that over and over again.

Stand up. Speak plainly. Be unafraid. You can practice any faith in this country, but the supremacy of the Constitution and the Judeo-Christian moral framework that shaped it is non-negotiable. It is what guarantees your freedom in the first place.

If you come here and honor that foundation, welcome. If you come here to undermine it, you do not belong here.

Wake up to what is unfolding before the consequences arrive. Because when a nation refuses to say what is true, the truth eventually forces its way in — and by then, it is always too late.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Shocking: AI-written country song tops charts, sparks soul debate

VCG / Contributor | Getty Images

A machine can imitate heartbreak well enough to top the charts, but it cannot carry grief, choose courage, or hear the whisper that calls human beings to something higher.

The No. 1 country song in America right now was not written in Nashville or Texas or even L.A. It came from code. “Walk My Walk,” the AI-generated single by the AI artist Breaking Rust, hit the top spot on Billboard’s Country Digital Song Sales chart, and if you listen to it without knowing that fact, you would swear a real singer lived the pain he is describing.

Except there is no “he.” There is no lived experience. There is no soul behind the voice dominating the country music charts.

If a machine can imitate the soul, then what is the soul?

I will admit it: I enjoy some AI music. Some of it is very good. And that leaves us with a question that is no longer science fiction. If a machine can fake being human this well, what does it mean to be human?

A new world of artificial experience

This is not just about one song. We are walking straight into a technological moment that will reshape everyday life.

Elon Musk said recently that we may not even have phones in five years. Instead, we will carry a small device that listens, anticipates, and creates — a personal AI agent that knows what we want to hear before we ask. It will make the music, the news, the podcasts, the stories. We already live in digital bubbles. Soon, those bubbles might become our own private worlds.

If an algorithm can write a hit country song about hardship and perseverance without a shred of actual experience, then the deeper question becomes unavoidable: If a machine can imitate the soul, then what is the soul?

What machines can never do

A machine can produce, and soon it may produce better than we can. It can calculate faster than any human mind. It can rearrange the notes and words of a thousand human songs into something that sounds real enough to fool millions.

But it cannot care. It cannot love. It cannot choose right and wrong. It cannot forgive because it cannot be hurt. It cannot stand between a child and danger. It cannot walk through sorrow.

A machine can imitate the sound of suffering. It cannot suffer.

The difference is the soul. The divine spark. The thing God breathed into man that no code will ever have. Only humans can take pain and let it grow into compassion. Only humans can take fear and turn it into courage. Only humans can rebuild their lives after losing everything. Only humans hear the whisper inside, the divine voice that says, “Live for something greater.”

We are building artificial minds. We are not building artificial life.

Questions that define us

And as these artificial minds grow sharper, as their tools become more convincing, the right response is not panic. It is to ask the oldest and most important questions.

Who am I? Why am I here? What is the meaning of freedom? What is worth defending? What is worth sacrificing for?

That answer is not found in a lab or a server rack. It is found in that mysterious place inside each of us where reason meets faith, where suffering becomes wisdom, where God reminds us we are more than flesh and more than thought. We are not accidents. We are not circuits. We are not replaceable.

Europa Press News / Contributor | Getty Images

The miracle machines can never copy

Being human is not about what we can produce. Machines will outproduce us. That is not the question. Being human is about what we can choose. We can choose to love even when it costs us something. We can choose to sacrifice when it is not easy. We can choose to tell the truth when the world rewards lies. We can choose to stand when everyone else bows. We can create because something inside us will not rest until we do.

An AI content generator can borrow our melodies, echo our stories, and dress itself up like a human soul, but it cannot carry grief across a lifetime. It cannot forgive an enemy. It cannot experience wonder. It cannot look at a broken world and say, “I am going to build again.”

The age of machines is rising. And if we do not know who we are, we will shrink. But if we use this moment to remember what makes us human, it will help us to become better, because the one thing no algorithm will ever recreate is the miracle that we exist at all — the miracle of the human soul.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Is Socialism seducing a lost generation?

Jeremy Weine / Stringer | Getty Images

A generation that’s lost faith in capitalism is turning to the oldest lie on earth: equality through control.

Something is breaking in America’s young people. You can feel it in every headline, every grocery bill, every young voice quietly asking if the American dream still means anything at all.

For many, the promise of America — work hard, build something that lasts, and give the next generation a better start — feels like it no longer exists. Home ownership and stability have become luxuries for a fortunate few.

Capitalism is not a perfect system. It is flawed because people are flawed, but it remains the only system that rewards creativity and effort rather than punishing them.

In that vacuum of hope, a new promise has begun to rise — one that sounds compassionate, equal, and fair. The promise of socialism.

The appeal of a broken dream

When the American dream becomes a checklist of things few can afford — a home, a car, two children, even a little peace — disappointment quickly turns to resentment. The average first-time homebuyer is now 40 years old. Debt lasts longer than marriages. The cost of living rises faster than opportunity.

For a generation that has never seen the system truly work, capitalism feels like a rigged game built to protect those already at the top.

That is where socialism finds its audience. It presents itself as fairness for the forgotten and justice for the disillusioned. It speaks softly at first, offering equality, compassion, and control disguised as care.

We are seeing that illusion play out now in New York City, where Zohran Mamdani — an open socialist — has won a major political victory. The same ideology that once hid behind euphemisms now campaigns openly throughout America’s once-great cities. And for many who feel left behind, it sounds like salvation.

But what socialism calls fairness is submission dressed as virtue. What it calls order is obedience. Once the system begins to replace personal responsibility with collective dependence, the erosion of liberty is only a matter of time.

The bridge that never ends

Socialism is not a destination; it is a bridge. Karl Marx described it as the necessary transition to communism — the scaffolding that builds the total state. Under socialism, people are taught to obey. Under communism, they forget that any other options exist.

History tells the story clearly. Russia, China, Cambodia, Cuba — each promised equality and delivered misery. One hundred million lives were lost, not because socialism failed, but because it succeeded at what it was designed to do: make the state supreme and the individual expendable.

Today’s advocates insist their version will be different — democratic, modern, and kind. They often cite Sweden as an example, but Sweden’s prosperity was never born of socialism. It grew out of capitalism, self-reliance, and a shared moral culture. Now that system is cracking under the weight of bureaucracy and division.

ANGELA WEISS / Contributor | Getty Images

The real issue is not economic but moral. Socialism begins with a lie about human nature — that people exist for the collective and that the collective knows better than the individual.

This lie is contrary to the truths on which America was founded — that rights come not from government’s authority, but from God’s. Once government replaces that authority, compassion becomes control, and freedom becomes permission.

What young America deserves

Young Americans have many reasons to be frustrated. They were told to study, work hard, and follow the rules — and many did, only to find the goalposts moved again and again. But tearing down the entire house does not make it fairer; it only leaves everyone standing in the rubble.

Capitalism is not a perfect system. It is flawed because people are flawed, but it remains the only system that rewards creativity and effort rather than punishing them. The answer is not revolution but renewal — moral, cultural, and spiritual.

It means restoring honesty to markets, integrity to government, and faith to the heart of our nation. A people who forsake God will always turn to government for salvation, and that road always ends in dependency and decay.

Freedom demands something of us. It requires faith, discipline, and courage. It expects citizens to govern themselves before others govern them. That is the truth this generation deserves to hear again — that liberty is not a gift from the state but a calling from God.

Socialism always begins with promises and ends with permission. It tells you what to drive, what to say, what to believe, all in the name of fairness. But real fairness is not everyone sharing the same chains — it is everyone having the same chance.

The American dream was never about guarantees. It was about the right to try, to fail, and try again. That freedom built the most prosperous nation in history, and it can do so again if we remember that liberty is not a handout but a duty.

Socialism does not offer salvation. It requires subservience.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.