CALLER: Hey, guys, how are you? That was such a great interview with Bill. I have to tell you, I've missed his voice. I've missed his take on things, and I would love for you guys to get him on The Blaze.
GLENN: So would I. I would pay him in sandwiches.
CALLER: That's just my two cents on that. But, Glenn, I wanted to ask you something you were talking about a week or maybe two ago about how there's this little blogger guy that was trying to get everybody to boycott fox, the advertisers.
GLENN: Yeah.
CALLER: Couldn't get any traction in the United States, so he went to the British advertisers.
GLENN: Yes. He's now running media matters, isn't he? That's the stop Beck guy. I could be wrong, but he's running one of the big ones. I think it's media matters. But go ahead.
CALLER: Right. And, well, I can tell you this: I am -- I'm not going to boycott anybody and neither are many of our family members and friends, but we have decided since we are the older generation and the money really resides in our pockets and our bank accounts, not in our childrens, that we're going to be paying a lot of attention to who we support, who we spend our money with. Like I said, I'm not going to be boycotting anybody, but I am going to be paying attention to whether or not they appreciate my money.
GLENN: Yeah, I will tell you this. Thank you, Sharon, for your phone call. I will tell you this. ABC is really -- this is an interesting thing. Ben Sherwood is the head of ABC television. He doesn't make all of these decisions, but Ben is a friend of mine. I know him. I really respect him. He's a decent, decent guy. Doesn't hate, you know, Christians are the center of the country. I really think ends all of that and appreciates it. And, you know, one thing that I found amazing at the height of Glenn Beck is the most hated man in the world, I was at a big television conference and all the everybodies were there. Here he is head of ABC Disney, and he sees me across the room, I see him, and one of my guy says you want to go say hi to Ben? And I'm, like, no, he's in a pack of all the big executives from all the big networks. I don't want to do that.
STU: Last thing you want to do to Ben.
GLENN: Ben is a friend. I'm not going to impose myself on him in that circle. Ben looks over and sees me, and I'm across the room. He sees me, I see him say excuse me. He walks over across the room, and I start walking toward him. Halfway there, very crowded with all the it people in L.A. gives me a hug and says -- and as I'm hugging him, I said are you out of your mind? And he said, no, you're my friend.
He's a really good guy. So I don't believe this stuff about ABC firing, you know -- getting rid of Tim Allen because of some, you know, we don't want Christians. We don't want the center of the country. That doesn't make sense in the first place. But, you know, we looked at -- what is that TV gallows? TV Grim Reaper. This guy's usually right about stuff. And he said the Tim Allen show was going to be brought back and was quote on the bubble. But it's a really good performing show.
STU: Look at this. Let me give you basis to this. So this is a guy who does -- it's a site that predicts whether shows will be canceled or not.
GLENN: Uh-huh.
STU: And they do this all the time.
GLENN: Don't you wish you could just make money doing that.
STU: It's based on, like, ratings and ratings relative to the rest of the network. Also really intricate things like once you get to season 5, you are more likely for syndication, so almost everyone renews everything when it gets past season 4. They always get a fifth season.
GLENN: If you get to ten seasons, you've got -- you're in syndication for years and years and years.
STU: Yeah, so they -- they put all of that into a formula and come out with a percentage chance it's going to be renewed. So then they make a prediction. Will it be renewed or not? This is from 2009. They were 63-11. 85 percent correct. 2010, 94 percent correct. 2011, 93 percent. 2012, 92 percent. 2013, 93 percent, 47, 92 percent, 2015, 90 percent. So very accurate over a long period of time with this formula and the way they figure these things out. They run every year, and it's up on the site now, a final renewal cancelation prediction for every show.
GLENN: Do they do it by percentage of --
STU: Yes, how likely is it? For example, just looking at agents of shield is one that they missed with here. But they -- and they do miss, as I just said. About 90 percent right. They had as a 35 percent renewal chance, and it was renewed. The catch on ABC was a 45 percent chance to be renewed. It got canceled. American crime. 25 percent to get renewed. It got canceled. The real O'Neals. 15 percent to get renewed, it got canceled.
GLENN: That's pretty accurate, still.
STU: There's one miss in there. But they thought it was a good chance.
GLENN: But not a huge chance.
STU: Blackish, 100 percent chance renewed, renewed. Goldbergs, 99 percent chance got renewed. Modern family. Got renewed. Goes through all of these, designated survey. 99 percent chance to get renewed. Got renewed. Last Man Standing. 90 percent it would be renewed. Got canceled.
GLENN: That's interesting.
STU: The tweet from the site. This is, again, from TV grim reaper, which I love, was I would say that last man standing was among the most surprising renewal pricking misses in the reaper's history.
JEFFY: Wow.
STU: Again, this is 90 percent accurate, and they miss occasionally. But when they think there's a 90 percent chance of it being renewed. It almost never is canceled. There's only one other show that I found this entire season. There's one 80 percent chance they thought renewed was canceled. It could be that one was also on Dr. Ken on ABC, so it's possible that maybe ABC is very cancel happy this season. I don't know. You could make excuses. But it is a stand out for people who look at this thing for a living.
GLENN: And it's -- it is also a stand out for people who are looking for shows that relate to the center of the country. And quite honestly, if you're programming, you don't -- you don't want to be just on the coasts. You don't want to be a network. You need to connect with the center of the country. This highly successful show on the worst night of the week. It's Friday night. Nobody staying at home watching TV shows on Friday night. It's the worst show of the week, and it is -- it's only -- it was only down 5 percent. Other shows that stayed were down 30 percent. And it just doesn't make any sense. But it doesn't make sense for ABC to cancel it. But I will tell you. If I'm sitting in a room, and I'm the network, there is something that I would sit at that table and say, guys. Guys. This show relates to the center of the country. This show relates like Rosanne did. This show relates to the people in our country like politics. We're having enough time getting people to think that we're not against them. Leave that show on. That's doing well. Even if it was doing worse, leave that show on. It helps us in the long run. It doesn't make any sense.
I’ve only felt this weight once before. It was 2001, just as my radio show was about to begin. The World Trade Center fell, and I was called to speak immediately. I spent the day and night by my bedside, praying for words that could meet the moment.
Yesterday, I found myself in the same position. September 11, 2025. The assassination of Charlie Kirk. A friend. A warrior for truth.
Moments like this make words feel inadequate. Yet sometimes, words from another time speak directly to our own. In 1947, Dylan Thomas, watching his father slip toward death, penned lines that now resonate far beyond his own grief:
Do not go gentle into that good night. / Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Thomas was pleading for his father to resist the impending darkness of death. But those words have become a mandate for all of us: Do not surrender. Do not bow to shadows. Even when the battle feels unwinnable.
Charlie Kirk lived that mandate. He knew the cost of speaking unpopular truths. He knew the fury of those who sought to silence him. And yet he pressed on. In his life, he embodied a defiance rooted not in anger, but in principle.
Washington, Jefferson, Adams — our history was started by men who raged against an empire, knowing the gallows might await. Lincoln raged against slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. raged against segregation. Every generation faces a call to resist surrender.
It is our turn. Charlie’s violent death feels like a knockout punch. Yet if his life meant anything, it means this: Silence in the face of darkness is not an option.
He did not go gently. He spoke. He challenged. He stood. And now, the mantle falls to us. To me. To you. To every American.
We cannot drift into the shadows. We cannot sit quietly while freedom fades. This is our moment to rage — not with hatred, not with vengeance, but with courage. Rage against lies, against apathy, against the despair that tells us to do nothing. Because there is always something you can do.
Even small acts — defiance, faith, kindness — are light in the darkness. Reaching out to those who mourn. Speaking truth in a world drowning in deceit. These are the flames that hold back the night. Charlie carried that torch. He laid it down yesterday. It is ours to pick up.
The light may dim, but it always does before dawn. Commit today: I will not sleep as freedom fades. I will not retreat as darkness encroaches. I will not be silent as evil forces claim dominion. I have no king but Christ. And I know whom I serve, as did Charlie.
On Wednesday, the world changed again. Two tragedies, separated by decades, bound by the same question: Who are we? Is this worth saving? What kind of people will we choose to be?
Imagine a world where more of us choose to be peacemakers. Not passive, not silent, but builders of bridges where others erect walls. Respect and listening transform even the bitterest of foes. Charlie Kirk embodied this principle.
He did not strike the weak; he challenged the powerful. He reached across divides of politics, culture, and faith. He changed hearts. He sparked healing. And healing is what our nation needs.
At the center of all this is one truth: Every person is a child of God, deserving of dignity. Change will not happen in Washington or on social media. It begins at home, where loneliness and isolation threaten our souls. Family is the antidote. Imperfect, yes — but still the strongest source of stability and meaning.
Mark Wilson / Staff | Getty Images
Forgiveness, fidelity, faithfulness, and honor are not dusty words. They are the foundation of civilization. Strong families produce strong citizens. And today, Charlie’s family mourns. They must become our family too. We must stand as guardians of his legacy, shining examples of the courage he lived by.
I knew Charlie. I know how he would want us to respond: Multiply his courage. Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins. Out of darkness, great and glorious things will sprout — but we must be worthy of them.
Charlie Kirk lived defiantly. He stood in truth. He changed the world. And now, his torch is in our hands. Rage, not in violence, but in unwavering pursuit of truth and goodness. Rage against the dying of the light.
This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.
Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.
That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.
This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.
This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.
The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.
Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.
Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.
This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.
John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images
Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.
Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.
This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.
