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

The Hilarious and Unrealistic Eco Consequences of a Border Wall

April 21, 2017
Staff

WRITER

Uh oh. According to Jeff Corwin, American wildlife biologist and nature conservationist, there could be some unexpected and "unprecedented environmental catastrophes" should a border wall go up:

It's poised to cut through more than 1,200 miles of habitat along the border between the United States and Mexico. There are over 90 threatened and critically endangered species that are in the crosshairs because of this wall, and we've got over 100 migratory birds that will be impacted from this wall. The endangered Mexican gray wolf, only 133 individuals left of this iconic carnivore, this amazing canine. Its head is on the chopping block and likely could fall prey to extinction. The expanse of the jaguar, just now, being restored into its habitat in Arizona, will likely be extirpated, pushed back towards the precipice of extinction because of this disastrous wall.

Yikes.

"Hang on just a second. Animals don't have passports. There are no borders for animals, okay? They don't have pockets, so we can't require them now to have passports. They do not have pockets, except for the kangaroo, but that's a different continent," Glenn said Thursday on radio.

It turns out, borders are complicated with animals.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: If you were for a border fence or a border wall, you're for stronger immigration laws or at least enforcing. Not for stronger. You just want to enforce the laws that we have.

PAT: Hateful.

GLENN: You're going to probably change your mind. And this is going to be that moment that I always say, what was the pivot point? This will be the moment where you will say, this is my pivot point. I had never thought about this while we were talking about the border wall. Listen to this.

VOICE: Well, Craig, if this border wall happens, it will be an unprecedented environmental catastrophe.

PAT: This is Jeff Corwin, by the way. Jeff Corwin, who is -- I mean, he's an animal expert. We all know that. Remember, from -- was it Animal Planet, he did all those shows? And now he's on an ABC special.

GLENN: Yeah. Now, this is -- I want you to know --

PAT: Unprecedented.

GLENN: Unprecedented environmental tragedy and disaster.

PAT: Disaster.

VOICE: It's poised to cut through more than 1200 miles of habitat along the border between the United States and Mexico. There are over 90 threatened and critically endangered species that are in the -- in the crosshairs because of this wall. And we've got over 100 migratory birds that will be impacted from this wall.

GLENN: Now, listen to this. I want you to listen to this.

VOICE: The endangered Mexican gray wolf. Only 133 individuals left of this iconic carnivore. This amazing canine. Its head is on the chopping block. And likely could fall prey to extinction. The expanse of the jaguar. Just now, being restored into its habitat in Arizona will likely be extirpated. Pushed back towards the precipice of extinction because of this disastrous wall.

(talking over)

GLENN: Hang on just a second. Animals don't have passports. There are no borders for animals. Okay? They don't have pockets. So we can't require them now to have passports. They do not have pockets. Except for the kangaroo, but that's a different continent. So if we were talking about kangaroos, we could give them passports because they have pockets. Other than that, they don't have pockets. They don't have hands either. So they couldn't really step up to the little thing and they can't talk. It's complicated with animals. Borders are complicated with animals.

PAT: It is.

GLENN: Now, the one I'm worried about because we're talking about an environmental disaster, we're worried about the birds.

VOICE: At the risk of sounding ignorant or foolish, the bird specifically, wouldn't they just be able to fly over the wall?

PAT: This is great. He's almost afraid -- it's such an obvious question. He's afraid to ask it.

GLENN: I don't want to sound ignorant to anyone, but I'm going to dial in some common sense. All right. I'm just going to say it.

PAT: They fly, right?

GLENN: Birds, they can fly left and right, but I think they can fly up and down as well.

STU: Not 30 feet off the ground.

JEFFY: No.

PAT: And, by the way, the wall will not wind up being 30 feet, would be my guess. It will be ten, tops.

GLENN: Yes.

VOICE: Well, it's interesting you should say that, and it's actually an excellent question.

PAT: It is.

GLENN: Stop.

VOICE: And I'm sure many animals that fly can migrate over that wall.

PAT: Okay.

JEFFY: See.

STU: So, yes, they will fly over the wall.

GLENN: Yes.

PAT: So, in other words, sure.

GLENN: So it's a good question because it's an obvious question.

PAT: I didn't think you would ask it because you're on NBC. Who knew?

GLENN: Yeah, it's not a question that you should have asked. But it's a good question.

PAT: It sounds like Fox News propaganda to me. Birds can fly.

VOICE: But many animals actually stay very low. Many of these animals, for example, birds and bats are actually passing close to the -- to the ground's surface because they're heading towards plants.

PAT: I say, if they're that stupid, they probably deserve to run into the wall.

GLENN: Darwin. Darwin. If you're a bat and your sonar radar, whatever it is that makes you fly around without eyes is so bad that you can't find and see a 1700-mile fence --

(chuckling)

GLENN: -- natural selection should kick in for that bat.

PAT: It seems like trees would be killing them too. Right?

GLENN: Right. They're flying low because they're going for the plants. A rock.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: Private fences around homes. Yeah, anything.

GLENN: Come on. A home. A home.

STU: And a parked car. Anything would be --

GLENN: Can I tell you something --

PAT: Are we saying that the wall will be built out of glass and we're going to use Windex on it so they won't be able to see that it's a wall?

GLENN: Thump. Thump. Thump.

PAT: Maybe that's what it is. Maybe that's what it is.

GLENN: But let me tell you something, I think you're all dismissing the pictures that we've all seen of the Great Wall of China and all of the dead birds and the bats on both sides of that wall. Giant piles.

STU: Piles of bats?"

GLENN: And it doesn't -- after a while, the wall doesn't matter because the dead bats are just -- they become ramps. And you just walk on the bodies of dead bats.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: Yeah, it's a bat ramp. You're mocking. Were you mocking?

STU: No, I said it was a bat ramp. A bamp.

GLENN: But that was not mocking?

STU: No, no, no. It's a very important part of our security.

GLENN: We should use that. You know what, I'll give that free to the scientific community. Vamps. It's yours, but I ==

STU: Bamp. Bat ramp.

GLENN: Or a bamp. Yeah, bat ramp. A bamp. You can use that in all your -- all your, you know, scientific literature on why this is going to be such a hassle.

PAT: Devastating. Devastating disaster.

GLENN: Devastating disaster for the birds that can't fly.

PAT: They're on the chopping block. The wolves are on a chopping block. Are they actually going to put wolves' heads on chopping blocks and cut their heads off?

STU: Right. The imagery is so great.

PAT: Well, I'm sorry. We can't build this wall until I cut your head off.

GLENN: If there are 150 of them, what do you say that we make sure that it's not all the male wolves on one side and female wolves on the other.

STU: Or, you know, there is an argument against free-range wolves. I don't know if anyone knows this.

GLENN: No, no. These are beautiful animals. They're carnivores. They're beautiful carnivores.

STU: That sounds terrible, actually.

GLENN: Have you ever seen a wolf?

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: In real life?

PAT: Yes.

GLENN: They are terrifying.

STU: Yes.

GLENN: I saw -- you know, Little Red Riding Hood, it was a wolf that ate her and the grandma. I mean, hello.

STU: That's right.

PAT: And then jaguars. Do we really want jaguars roaming free on the border?

GLENN: I'd like them to stay on the Mexican side. I mean, that's cool. I don't have a problem with that.

STU: Yes.

PAT: Yeah. Yeah.

STU: That's one of the benefits of the wall. I think we put all the dangerous animals on the other side of it.

GLENN: On that side. You can have the jaguars. I love that about you and Mexico. And I'll go visit and see those jaguars. You let them mate on your side of the wall.

PAT: But even so, I'm kind of confused as to why they can't just move out of the way of the wall being built and then go back their business.

STU: Well, the imagery there is amazing. These animals are in the crosshairs. They're on the chopping block.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: Like none of these things are real.

PAT: What are you talking about?

STU: What, they wouldn't move 100 yards? I understand that that is -- it could be theoretically --

GLENN: Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay.

PAT: There's actually a river between the two countries too. Now that they navigate --

GLENN: Okay. Okay. All right. Oh, my gosh.

JEFFY: Thanks to the bridge.

GLENN: Do we need to look? Do I need to bring up north and South Korea where all of the DMZ, where all of the little wolf family members are living in freedom and the -- and the North Korean wolves are living in slavery and they're not able to see each other anymore and they don't know if they're alive or dead?

Imagine, you're a wolf, and you don't know if you're alive or dead. If you're -- if your relative who you love is on the other side of the wall with a concussion or worse because it didn't see the wall and ran right into it, trying to come home to you. It's wrong. It was wrong with the Berlin wall. It was wrong with the Great Wall of China. Jina. It's -- it's wrong for birds. It's wrong for bats. It is wrong for panthers, jaguars. BMWs.

PAT: Mexican timberwolves. Whatever.

GLENN: All of them.

PAT: All of them. Separating wolf families.

GLENN: Bad. You go ahead. You break up the families.

Could we -- could we go to Victoria in New York. Yes, Victoria. You're on. More on bird talk. You're on bird talk. Go ahead. Hello, Victoria. Line one.

That's Mary. Hang on, put Mary on hold. And let's go to Victoria. Line one, please. There we go.

Victoria, hi.

CALLER: Yes, hi. I just love this show.

GLENN: Thank you.

CALLER: I wanted to make a comparison here. They're so concerned about the wall.

GLENN: Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

CALLER: But, meanwhile, what about those windmills that are out there killing birds that are supposed to be great for the environment?

PAT: Right. Where is Jeff Corwin on those?

Bill Gates ends climate fear campaign, declares AI the future ruler

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The Big Tech billionaire once said humanity must change or perish. Now he claims we’ll survive — just as elites prepare total surveillance.

For decades, Americans have been told that climate change is an imminent apocalypse — the existential threat that justifies every intrusion into our lives, from banning gas stoves to rationing energy to tracking personal “carbon scores.”

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates helped lead that charge. He warned repeatedly that the “climate disaster” would be the greatest crisis humanity would ever face. He invested billions in green technology and demanded the world reach net-zero emissions by 2050 “to avoid catastrophe.”

The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch.

Now, suddenly, he wants everyone to relax: Climate change “will not lead to humanity’s demise” after all.

Gates was making less of a scientific statement and more of a strategic pivot. When elites retire a crisis, it’s never because the threat is gone — it’s because a better one has replaced it. And something else has indeed arrived — something the ruling class finds more useful than fear of the weather.The same day Gates downshifted the doomsday rhetoric, Amazon announced it would pay warehouse workers $30 an hour — while laying off 30,000 people because artificial intelligence will soon do their jobs.

Climate panic was the warm-up. AI control is the main event.

The new currency of power

The world once revolved around oil and gas. Today, it revolves around the electricity demanded by server farms, the chips that power machine learning, and the data that can be used to manipulate or silence entire populations. The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch. Whoever controls energy now controls information. And whoever controls information controls civilization.

Climate alarmism gave elites a pretext to centralize power over energy. Artificial intelligence gives them a mechanism to centralize power over people. The future battles will not be about carbon — they will be about control.

Two futures — both ending in tyranny

Americans are already being pushed into what look like two opposing movements, but both leave the individual powerless.

The first is the technocratic empire being constructed in the name of innovation. In its vision, human work will be replaced by machines, and digital permissions will subsume personal autonomy.

Government and corporations merge into a single authority. Your identity, finances, medical decisions, and speech rights become access points monitored by biometric scanners and enforced by automated gatekeepers. Every step, purchase, and opinion is tracked under the noble banner of “efficiency.”

The second is the green de-growth utopia being marketed as “compassion.” In this vision, prosperity itself becomes immoral. You will own less because “the planet” requires it. Elites will redesign cities so life cannot extend beyond a 15-minute walking radius, restrict movement to save the Earth, and ration resources to curb “excess.” It promises community and simplicity, but ultimately delivers enforced scarcity. Freedom withers when surviving becomes a collective permission rather than an individual right.

Both futures demand that citizens become manageable — either automated out of society or tightly regulated within it. The ruling class will embrace whichever version gives them the most leverage in any given moment.

Climate panic was losing its grip. AI dependency — and the obedience it creates — is far more potent.

The forgotten way

A third path exists, but it is the one today’s elites fear most: the path laid out in our Constitution. The founders built a system that assumes human beings are not subjects to be monitored or managed, but moral agents equipped by God with rights no government — and no algorithm — can override.

Hesham Elsherif / Stringer | Getty Images

That idea remains the most “disruptive technology” in history. It shattered the belief that people need kings or experts or global committees telling them how to live. No wonder elites want it erased.

Soon, you will be told you must choose: Live in a world run by machines or in a world stripped down for planetary salvation. Digital tyranny or rationed equality. Innovation without liberty or simplicity without dignity.

Both are traps.

The only way

The only future worth choosing is the one grounded in ordered liberty — where prosperity and progress exist alongside moral responsibility and personal freedom and human beings are treated as image-bearers of God — not climate liabilities, not data profiles, not replaceable hardware components.

Bill Gates can change his tune. The media can change the script. But the agenda remains the same.

They no longer want to save the planet. They want to run it, and they expect you to obey.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Why the White House restoration sent the left Into panic mode

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Presidents have altered the White House for decades, yet only Donald Trump is treated as a vandal for privately funding the East Wing’s restoration.

Every time a president so much as changes the color of the White House drapes, the press clutches its pearls. Unless the name on the stationery is Barack Obama’s, even routine restoration becomes a national outrage.

President Donald Trump’s decision to privately fund upgrades to the White House — including a new state ballroom — has been met with the usual chorus of gasps and sneers. You’d think he bulldozed Monticello.

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s ‘visionary.’

The irony is that presidents have altered and expanded the White House for more than a century. President Franklin D. Roosevelt added the East and West Wings in the middle of the Great Depression. Newspapers accused him of building a palace while Americans stood in breadlines. History now calls it “vision.”

First lady Nancy Reagan faced the same hysteria. Headlines accused her of spending taxpayer money on new china “while Americans starved.” In truth, she raised private funds after learning that the White House didn’t have enough matching plates for state dinners. She took the ridicule and refused to pass blame.

“I’m a big girl,” she told her staff. “This comes with the job.” That was dignity — something the press no longer recognizes.

A restoration, not a renovation

Trump’s project is different in every way that should matter. It costs taxpayers nothing. Not a cent. The president and a few friends privately fund the work. There’s no private pool or tennis court, no personal perks. The additions won’t even be completed until after he leaves office.

What’s being built is not indulgence — it’s stewardship. A restoration of aging rooms, worn fixtures, and century-old bathrooms that no longer function properly in the people’s house. Trump has paid for cast brass doorknobs engraved with the presidential seal, restored the carpets and moldings, and ensured that the architecture remains faithful to history.

The media’s response was mockery and accusations of vanity. They call it “grotesque excess,” while celebrating billion-dollar “climate art” projects and funneling hundreds of millions into activist causes like the No Kings movement. They lecture America on restraint while living off the largesse of billionaires.

The selective guardians of history

Where was this sudden reverence for history when rioters torched St. John’s Church — the same church where every president since James Madison has worshipped? The press called it an “expression of grief.”

Where was that reverence when mobs toppled statues of Washington, Jefferson, and Grant? Or when first lady Melania Trump replaced the Rose Garden’s lawn with a patio but otherwise followed Jackie Kennedy’s original 1962 plans in the garden’s restoration? They called that “desecration.”

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s “visionary.”

The real desecration

The people shrieking about “historic preservation” care nothing for history. They hate the idea that something lasting and beautiful might be built by hands they despise. They mock craftsmanship because it exposes their own cultural decay.

The White House ballroom is not a scandal — it’s a mirror. And what it reflects is the media’s own pettiness. The ruling class that ridicules restoration is the same class that cheered as America’s monuments fell. Its members sneer at permanence because permanence condemns them.

Julia Beverly / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s improvements are an act of faith — in the nation’s symbols, its endurance, and its worth. The outrage over a privately funded renovation says less about him than it does about the journalists who mistake destruction for progress.

The real desecration isn’t happening in the East Wing. It’s happening in the newsrooms that long ago tore up their own foundation — truth — and never bothered to rebuild it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Trump’s secret war in the Caribbean EXPOSED — It’s not about drugs

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The president’s moves in Venezuela, Guyana, and Colombia aren’t about drugs. They’re about re-establishing America’s sovereignty across the Western Hemisphere.

For decades, we’ve been told America’s wars are about drugs, democracy, or “defending freedom.” But look closer at what’s unfolding off the coast of Venezuela, and you’ll see something far more strategic taking shape. Donald Trump’s so-called drug war isn’t about fentanyl or cocaine. It’s about control — and a rebirth of American sovereignty.

The aim of Trump’s ‘drug war’ is to keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

The president understands something the foreign policy class forgot long ago: The world doesn’t respect apologies. It respects strength.

While the global elites in Davos tout the Great Reset, Trump is building something entirely different — a new architecture of power based on regional independence, not global dependence. His quiet campaign in the Western Hemisphere may one day be remembered as the second Monroe Doctrine.

Venezuela sits at the center of it all. It holds the world’s largest crude oil reserves — oil perfectly suited for America’s Gulf refineries. For years, China and Russia have treated Venezuela like a pawn on their chessboard, offering predatory loans in exchange for control of those resources. The result has been a corrupt, communist state sitting in our own back yard. For too long, Washington shrugged. Not any more.The naval exercises in the Caribbean, the sanctions, the patrols — they’re not about drug smugglers. They’re about evicting China from our hemisphere.

Trump is using the old “drug war” playbook to wage a new kind of war — an economic and strategic one — without firing a shot at our actual enemies. The goal is simple: Keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

Beyond Venezuela

Just east of Venezuela lies Guyana, a country most Americans couldn’t find on a map a year ago. Then ExxonMobil struck oil, and suddenly Guyana became the newest front in a quiet geopolitical contest. Washington is helping defend those offshore platforms, build radar systems, and secure undersea cables — not for charity, but for strategy. Control energy, data, and shipping lanes, and you control the future.

Moreover, Colombia — a country once defined by cartels — is now positioned as the hinge between two oceans and two continents. It guards the Panama Canal and sits atop rare-earth minerals every modern economy needs. Decades of American presence there weren’t just about cocaine interdiction; they were about maintaining leverage over the arteries of global trade. Trump sees that clearly.

PEDRO MATTEY / Contributor | Getty Images

All of these recent news items — from the military drills in the Caribbean to the trade negotiations — reflect a new vision of American power. Not global policing. Not endless nation-building. It’s about strategic sovereignty.

It’s the same philosophy driving Trump’s approach to NATO, the Middle East, and Asia. We’ll stand with you — but you’ll stand on your own two feet. The days of American taxpayers funding global security while our own borders collapse are over.

Trump’s Monroe Doctrine

Critics will call it “isolationism.” It isn’t. It’s realism. It’s recognizing that America’s strength comes not from fighting other people’s wars but from securing our own energy, our own supply lines, our own hemisphere. The first Monroe Doctrine warned foreign powers to stay out of the Americas. The second one — Trump’s — says we’ll defend them, but we’ll no longer be their bank or their babysitter.

Historians may one day mark this moment as the start of a new era — when America stopped apologizing for its own interests and started rebuilding its sovereignty, one barrel, one chip, and one border at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Antifa isn’t “leaderless” — It’s an organized machine of violence

Jeff J Mitchell / Staff | Getty Images

The mob rises where men of courage fall silent. The lesson from Portland, Chicago, and other blue cities is simple: Appeasing radicals doesn’t buy peace — it only rents humiliation.

Parts of America, like Portland and Chicago, now resemble occupied territory. Progressive city governments have surrendered control to street militias, leaving citizens, journalists, and even federal officers to face violent anarchists without protection.

Take Portland, where Antifa has terrorized the city for more than 100 consecutive nights. Federal officers trying to keep order face nightly assaults while local officials do nothing. Independent journalists, such as Nick Sortor, have even been arrested for documenting the chaos. Sortor and Blaze News reporter Julio Rosas later testified at the White House about Antifa’s violence — testimony that corporate media outlets buried.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened.

Chicago offers the same grim picture. Federal agents have been stalked, ambushed, and denied backup from local police while under siege from mobs. Calls for help went unanswered, putting lives in danger. This is more than disorder; it is open defiance of federal authority and a violation of the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.

A history of violence

For years, the legacy media and left-wing think tanks have portrayed Antifa as “decentralized” and “leaderless.” The opposite is true. Antifa is organized, disciplined, and well-funded. Groups like Rose City Antifa in Oregon, the Elm Fork John Brown Gun Club in Texas, and Jane’s Revenge operate as coordinated street militias. Legal fronts such as the National Lawyers Guild provide protection, while crowdfunding networks and international supporters funnel money directly to the movement.

The claim that Antifa lacks structure is a convenient myth — one that’s cost Americans dearly.

History reminds us what happens when mobs go unchecked. The French Revolution, Weimar Germany, Mao’s Red Guards — every one began with chaos on the streets. But it wasn’t random. Today’s radicals follow the same playbook: Exploit disorder, intimidate opponents, and seize moral power while the state looks away.

Dismember the dragon

The Trump administration’s decision to designate Antifa a domestic terrorist organization was long overdue. The label finally acknowledged what citizens already knew: Antifa functions as a militant enterprise, recruiting and radicalizing youth for coordinated violence nationwide.

But naming the threat isn’t enough. The movement’s financiers, organizers, and enablers must also face justice. Every dollar that funds Antifa’s destruction should be traced, seized, and exposed.

AFP Contributor / Contributor | Getty Images

This fight transcends party lines. It’s not about left versus right; it’s about civilization versus anarchy. When politicians and judges excuse or ignore mob violence, they imperil the republic itself. Americans must reject silence and cowardice while street militias operate with impunity.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened. The violence in Portland and Chicago is deliberate, not spontaneous. If America fails to confront it decisively, the price won’t just be broken cities — it will be the erosion of the republic itself.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.