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

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Comedians Nail the Problem With the PC Culture

April 18, 2017
Staff

WRITER

Comedians have historically crossed the lines drawn by the rest of society. They did it in the 70s and 80s with religion, racism and a host of other issues. Today, as the PC culture tries to normalize itself, comedians are the ones pushing back.

"They weren't ever making these kinds of points in the last 20 years. They were not making the, Hey, get control points," Glenn said Tuesday on radio. "They were making the point of, We've got to move forward. We've got to progress."

RELATED: Denouncing Dave: Chappelle’s New Comedy Called ‘Homophobic’ and ‘Transphobic’

To illustrate the change, Glenn played several excerpts from contemporary comedians like Dave Chappelle, Jim Norton and Patton Oswalt.

Has the PC pendulum swung back enough so we can have a little common sense and laugh at ourselves again?

Listen to this segment beginning at mark 9:56 from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: Who was it -- was it Dave Chappelle? Do you have that Dave Chappelle cut? There's that Dave Chappelle where he talks about -- how is the African-American losing here?

JEFFY: They are.

GLENN: Yeah. He's like, we're -- we've lost our place. I mean, we've struggled forever and ever and ever. And now, where are we? And he's not the only comedian. Who is the other comedian?

STU: Yeah. Patton Oswalt Did something kind of on this where, you know -- again, these are not conservatives.

GLENN: No.

STU: These are liberals who are like, wait a minute, guys.

GLENN: And so was -- what's his name? Louis C.K.

PAT: Here's Dave Chappelle on the gay movement. Oh.

STU: Right now, I don't think it's sounding that loud. I think louder would be better.

GLENN: Yeah.

PAT: Well, he's got a very quiet voice. I don't know if you've ever seen him live, but he's very, very, very quiet.

CHAPPELLE: I get it though. I understand why gay people are mad, and I empathize. You know what, I'm just telling you as a black dude, I support your movement. But if you want to take some advice from a Negro, pace yourself. These things take a while. Just because they passed the law doesn't mean they're going to like you. Brown vs. Board of Education was in 1955. Somebody called me a (bleep) in traffic last Wednesday. That's how long it takes. It takes a minute.

(laughter)

PAT: He's really funny.

GLENN: He is. He's really genius. He's really genius.

PAT: Really funny.

STU: So we have a bunch of clips here of comedians. I'm going to take just a quick break here with Mr. Pat Gray to make sure he has the most updated emails.

GLENN: You're saying that maybe there's an F-word or two?

STU: I'm saying we need to be careful to make sure you're playing the most updated.

GLENN: All right. We'll take a quick break here and then we'll make sure that we -- we've rinsed out their mouths.

[break]

GLENN: Welcome to the program.

So, you know, we were talking about political correctness and -- and who is -- who is at the top of the food chain? It used to be white males. That's long gone. You're at the bottom --

PAT: We're at the very bottom.

JEFFY: Long, long ago.

GLENN: Very bottom. Then it was females. But females are no longer at the top. Then it was homosexuals. Homosexuals are not at the top. It might be transgender. But I don't think so.

Who is at the top of the female -- it's not the African-American anymore. As you just heard from Dave Chappelle.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: Now, listen, we've got about four comedians that are right now out, who are not conservative --

STU: At all. Exact opposite.

GLENN: Play this. Play this cut.

STU: It's Patton Oswalt.

GLENN: Listen to this.

OSWALT: I could not be a more committed, progressive, feminist, pro-gay, pro-transgender person, but I cannot keep up with the (bleep) glossary of correct terms. I'm trying! I want to help, but, holy (bleep), it's like the secret club password. They change it every week. And then you're in trouble. That's not the word we use. (bleep). It was just last week. I have hemorrhoids. My (bleep) is falling out. I want to help. I know I'm an old this (bleep) white (bleep), but don't give me (bleep) because I didn't know the right term. (bleep) RuPaul. RuPaul got into shit for saying "tranny." Ru (bleep) Paul. RuPaul, who she laid down on the barbed wire of discrimination throughout the '70s and '80s so this new generation could run across her back and yell at her for saying "tranny."

(laughter)

PAT: So good.

JEFFY: That is a fact.

PAT: Oh, that's --

STU: I mean, that's amazing that a progressive -- comedians are even noticing how far this has come. And they're not going to agree with the conservative audience on the points behind it. But that's kind of the issue here. You're even taking your own allies. And people who are rooting for you and want you to get everything that you want. And you're still torturing them over these things.

PAT: The same comedian, Patton Oswalt. Was it his nephew that's gay that came to him and was talking about how bad things were.

STU: I think it was his nephew, or maybe a friend's nephew.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: Yeah.

OSWALT: Moved to LA. Came out of the closet. Told his parents. His parents went, duh. Now he's happy. He's married. Happy. He's running a business.

But he has a nephew who goes to his old high school. And so he's really protective of this kid because his nephew is openly, proudly, defiantly gay. Going to high school. And my friend is like, if anyone gives him (bleep), I will burn that (bleep) to the -- he's so protective. And I get it.

So he went back for Thanksgiving, and he's talking to his nephew. And he goes, is everything okay at that school? You know, I went there. I didn't have the best time. If you ever, like, want to like talk to me about it. How are things? Are they -- are they oppressive? Are they mean?

And his nephew started choking up and said, "Yeah. You know, it's -- it's pretty rough there. You know, they're still really oppressive. And it's pretty harsh." And my friend, the way he put it to me was my -- my inner Liam Neeson woke up, right? He was -- like he was thinking, "Give me a name." Like he just wanted a --

(laughter)

But he kept his cool, and he was like, "Well, just. Let's talk about it. What's going on? What are they doing to you?" And his nephew said, "Well, you know, for instance, my gay lesbian transgender club at school, we wanted to have our prom the same night as the straight kids' prom, and they're going to make us wait two weeks to have it. So it's just really oppressive, you know."

(laughter)

And my friend had to stop himself from saying, "You need to shut the (bleep) up because I don't think you know what oppressive means."

(laughter)

GLENN: How true is that?

STU: Yeah.

PAT: Oh, man.

STU: Because, you know --

PAT: Very.

STU: There was no gay or lesbian club when the uncle went there. There was no gay or lesbian prom. And the fact that you had to hold it on a different day, that actually seems more special. You get your own day. It's amazing that -- to see that happening in -- you know, in the world of pop culture. I mean, comedians who are, you know --

GLENN: And comedians lead the way.

STU: And they're the ones that will constantly walk over lines that the rest of society has drawn. You know, they -- and they've dawn this forever. They did it with religion back in the day.

GLENN: And they didn't do this before. They didn't -- they weren't ever making these kinds of points in the last 20 years. They were not making the, hey -- hey, get control.

They were not making those points. They were making the point of, we've got to move forward. We've got to progress.

STU: Look at these hicks that are stopping -- and they still make those points. There's no doubt.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

STU: But you're right. It's the opposite. It's like, wait a minute. We're trying to help you. And, still, you're torturing us over these things. I mean, that RuPaul point is amazing. I mean, I don't remember that story.

JEFFY: That sure is.

STU: But, I mean, if RuPaul is getting heat for not being transgender friendly enough, you might be going too far here.

GLENN: You might?

STU: You might be over the line.

GLENN: You think?

Well, if you want to be a hatemonger like that, Stu.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Then you can hate all you want. The rest of us know.

STU: The rest of us? The rest of us know?

GLENN: Yeah, the rest of us know.

PAT: The enlightened ones.

GLENN: The enlightened ones.

STU: But the Chappelle thing is new. Patton Oswalt.

GLENN: I know there's a Louis C.K. thing too.

STU: There's also a Jim Norton. Do we have a Jim Norton clip as well? His latest Netflix special has -- I hope they edited this one.

(chuckling)

Jim Norton can --

PAT: Yeah, he can get dirty.

GLENN: If they didn't edit this, I just want to say goodbye now. Thank you -- thank you for the time spent listening to us and all of your support over the years.

STU: We do have a delay built in, so if anything happens, you'll be fine.

GLENN: Here we go.

NORTON: But it's funny. The whole country is trans crazy. And we're really obsessed with it. And it's so funny how when the new thing happens or becomes in the lexicon, you can't joke about it on TV. Like, I tried to do a Caitlin Jenner joke. The networks were like, no transitioning jokes. And I'm like, well, it's not even a mean joke. And they were like, yeah, but we just don't like it. They've been marginalized.

I'm like, look, just because you've been marginalized doesn't mean you're removed from the humor spectrum like everybody -- like it wasn't even a mean -- first of all, the network canceled her reality show. How (bleep) is your reality show when you are on a Wheaties box. You're now a woman. You were a Kardashian. You killed somebody driving. And then, just boring. There's nothing happening.

(laughter)

And I think Hollywood means well. I think their hearts are in the right place. But it's a little bit phony. Some of it is just a little bit fake. Because you know how they can't talk about Caitlyn without saying how beautiful Caitlyn she is. Have you seen how beautiful Caitlyn is? No. She looks like the gypsy from Thinner.

(laughter)

PAT: Oh, my.

STU: He's awesome. But, I mean, that -- look, I mean, that's, what? Three big comedians. You also mentioned Louis C.K. Maybe we can run that clip for tomorrow or something. But like, it's a bizarre trend. It's strange to hear from these people.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: It shows that perhaps the PC pendulum is swinging back closer to the, you know, let's have common sense and being able to laugh at ourselves and each other just a little bit here. No execution for words. Safe zones are ridiculous.

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.

Did Trump's '51st state' jab just cost Canada its independence?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Did Canadians just vote in their doom?

On April 28, 2025, Canada held its federal election, and what began as a promising conservative revival ended in a Liberal Party regroup, fueled by an anti-Trump narrative. This outcome is troubling for Canada, as Glenn revealed when he exposed the globalist tendencies of the new Prime Minister, Mark Carney. On a recent episode of his podcast, Glenn hosted former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss, who provided insight into Carney’s history. She revealed that, as governor of the Bank of England, Carney contributed to the 2022 pension crisis through policies that triggered excessive money printing, leading to rampant inflation.

Carney’s election and the Liberal Party’s fourth consecutive victory spell trouble for a Canada already straining under globalist policies. Many believed Canadians were fed up with the progressive agenda when former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigned amid plummeting public approval. Pierre Poilievre, the Conservative Party leader, started 2025 with a 25-point lead over his Liberal rivals, fueling optimism about his inevitable victory.

So, what went wrong? How did Poilievre go from predicted Prime Minister to losing his own parliamentary seat? And what details of this election could cost Canada dearly?

A Costly Election

Mark Carney (left) and Pierre Poilievre (right)

GEOFF ROBINSPETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

The election defied the expectations of many analysts who anticipated a Conservative win earlier this year.

For Americans unfamiliar with parliamentary systems, here’s a brief overview of Canada’s federal election process. Unlike U.S. presidential elections, Canadians do not directly vote for their Prime Minister. Instead, they vote for a political party. Each Canadian resides in a "riding," similar to a U.S. congressional district, and during the election, each riding elects a Member of Parliament (MP). The party that secures the majority of MPs forms the government and appoints its leader as Prime Minister.

At the time of writing, the Liberal Party has secured 169 of the 172 seats needed for a majority, all but ensuring their victory. In contrast, the Conservative Party holds 144 seats, indicating that the Liberal Party will win by a solid margin, which will make passing legislation easier. This outcome is a far cry from the landslide Conservative victory many had anticipated.

Poilievre's Downfall

PETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

What caused Poilievre’s dramatic fall from front-runner to losing his parliamentary seat?

Despite his surge in popularity earlier this year, which coincided with enthusiasm surrounding Trump’s inauguration, many attribute the Conservative loss to Trump’s influence. Commentators argue that Trump’s repeated references to Canada as the "51st state" gave Liberals a rallying cry: Canadian sovereignty. The Liberal Party framed a vote for Poilievre as a vote to surrender Canada to U.S. influence, positioning Carney as the defender of national independence.

Others argue that Poilievre’s lackluster campaign was to blame. Critics suggest he should have embraced a Trump-style, Canada-first message, emphasizing a balanced relationship with the U.S. rather than distancing himself from Trump’s annexation remarks. By failing to counter the Liberal narrative effectively, Poilievre lost momentum and voter confidence.

This election marks a pivotal moment for Canada, with far-reaching implications for its sovereignty and economic stability. As Glenn has warned, Carney’s globalist leanings could align Canada more closely with international agendas, potentially at the expense of its national interests. Canadians now face the challenge of navigating this new political landscape under a leader with a controversial track record.

Top FIVE takeaways from Glenn's EXCLUSIVE interview with Trump

Image courtesy of the White House

As President Trump approaches his 100th day in office, Glenn Beck joined him to evaluate his administration’s progress with a gripping new interview. April 30th is President Trump's 100th day in office, and what an eventful few months it has been. To commemorate this milestone, Glenn Beck was invited to the White House for an exclusive interview with the President.

Their conversation covered critical topics, including the border crisis, DOGE updates, the revival of the U.S. energy sector, AI advancements, and more. Trump remains energized, acutely aware of the nation’s challenges, and determined to address them.

Here are the top five takeaways from Glenn Beck’s one-on-one with President Trump:

Border Security and Cartels

DAVID SWANSON / Contributor | Getty Images

Early in the interview, Glenn asked if Trump views Mexico as a failed narco-state. While Trump avoided the term, he acknowledged that cartels effectively control Mexico. He noted that while not all Mexican officials are corrupt, those who are honest fear severe repercussions for opposing the cartels.

Trump was unsurprised when Glenn cited evidence that cartels are using Pentagon-supplied weapons intended for the Mexican military. He is also aware of the fentanyl influx from China through Mexico and is committed to stopping the torrent of the dangerous narcotic. Trump revealed that he has offered military aid to Mexico to combat the cartels, but these offers have been repeatedly declined. While significant progress has been made in securing the border, Trump emphasized that more must be done.

American Energy Revival

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s tariffs are driving jobs back to America, with the AI sector showing immense growth potential. He explained that future AI systems require massive, costly complexes with significant electricity demands. China is outpacing the U.S. in building power plants to support AI development, threatening America’s technological leadership.

To counter this, Trump is cutting bureaucratic red tape, allowing AI companies to construct their own power plants, potentially including nuclear facilities, to meet the energy needs of AI server farms. Glenn was thrilled to learn these plants could also serve as utilities, supplying excess power to homes and businesses. Trump is determined to ensure America remains the global leader in AI and energy.

Liberation Day Shakeup

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

Glenn drew a parallel between Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs and the historical post-World War II Liberation Day. Trump confirmed the analogy, explaining that his policy aims to dismantle an outdated global economic order established to rebuild Europe and Asia after the wars of the 20th century. While beneficial decades ago, this system now disadvantages the U.S. through job outsourcing, unfair trade deals, and disproportionate NATO contributions.

Trump stressed that America’s economic survival is at stake. Without swift action, the U.S. risks collapse, potentially dragging the West down with it. He views his presidency as a critical opportunity to reverse this decline.

Trouble in Europe

BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

When Glenn pressed Trump on his tariff strategy and negotiations with Europe, Trump delivered a powerful statement: “I don’t have to negotiate.” Despite America’s challenges, it remains the world’s leading economy with the wealthiest consumer base, making it an indispensable trading partner for Europe. Trump wants to make equitable deals and is willing to negotiate with European leaders out of respect and desire for shared prosperity, he knows that they are dependent on U.S. dollars to keep the lights on.

Trump makes an analogy, comparing America to a big store. If Europe wants to shop at the store, they are going to have to pay an honest price. Or go home empty-handed.

Need for Peace

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

Trump emphasized the need to end America’s involvement in endless wars, which have cost countless lives and billions of dollars without a clear purpose. He highlighted the staggering losses in Ukraine, where thousands of soldiers die weekly. Trump is committed to ending the conflict but noted that Ukrainian President Zelenskyy has been a challenging partner, constantly demanding more U.S. support.

The ongoing wars in Europe and the Middle East are unsustainable, and America’s excessive involvement has prolonged these conflicts, leading to further casualties. Trump aims to extricate the U.S. from these entanglements.