Let's Get Real Hollywood: Kathy Griffin's Photo Will Be Used as Propaganda by ISIS

June 05, 2017

WRITER

Kathy Griffin's photo stunt showing a decapitated U.S. president was vile. So much so that even those on the left were quick to denounce her antics --- for a few days at least. Now that the dust has settled, stars like Jim Carrey, Alec Baldwin and Jamie Foxx have come to her defense, calling comedy that pushes the line.

"You don't think . . . the Islamists are going to say that there is an American woman holding the head of the dead president, that's what the Americans think of their president? You don't think that's used for propaganda with the enemy? How anybody could defend what she did is repulsive," Mike Broomhead said, filling in for Glenn on radio.

Griffin compared her stunt to something singer Ted Nugent said during the Obama administration. Critics claim he threatened the life of the president, but that has been debunked.

"What do you think of Ted Nugent? How can you say anything different about Kathy Griffin and what she did? Except, she doubled down with a press conference. And I'll be honest, I think that was something contrived, to go out and blame the Trump family," Broomhead said. "This now has become publicity for her."

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

MIKE: Kathy Griffin, Alec Baldwin, Jamie Foxx, Jim Carrey, this to me -- let me just mirror some things. Just a couple of things to just compare and contrast. We have to be fair. Ann Coulter is not allowed to speak on a college campus. They're going to burn the place down if she shows up there. I've been critical to some degree as successful -- and she's been a lot smarter than I am.

But I've been critical of the fact that there are times when she'll be inflammatory versus smart -- and what I mean by that, her point may be brilliant, but she delivers it in a way that incites people. Which is just her style. But at the same time, there's nothing that she's ever said that's compared to what we saw in that photograph. There's no doubt in the minds of anybody what symbolism that was. The conversation about a noose left at the black history museum is absolute symbolism. There's no doubt that is a horrible piece of symbolism.

There's no doubt in my mind or anybody else with an ounce of common sense, that Kathy Griffin, holding up a head by the hair, the same way you see those ISIS pictures and those ISIS videos, that was symbolism. And she thought that was funny. And it wasn't. It crossed a big line. Then she apologized. There came to be a point where I thought even that press conference she gave was staged. It was like, what can we possibly say that would be the worst thing that you would say if you've done something wrong? Well, let's blame the victim. Let's blame the Trump family for what I did.

But aside from that, the reaction from people, you have conservative speakers that are going to speak on campuses -- whether you agree with the way they deliver their message or not, and they're burning campuses down. The police have to be called because they're going to burn the place down to the ground for somebody speaking. And yet nobody seems to be outraged about this. Alec Baldwin defender. Jim Carrey. And I got to be honest, I'm a huge Jim Carrey fan. This is the part of it that really is difficult sometimes. I think Jamie Foxx is one of the most talented people in Hollywood.

Jim Carrey's movie -- the first time I saw Ace Ventura, I thought I was going to cry, I was laughing so hard. Very talented people. Love their work. But how can they be of the mindset -- Jim Carrey saying that comedians are supposed to push the line. That they're the last defense. They're the last people telling the truth.

Well, you're kind of full of yourself there. There's a lot of people that tell the truth. And when somebody says something you don't agree with, you call it hateful. You want them shut down. You don't like the message by Milo or by, you know, Ann Coulter. You don't like Glenn Beck, as a right-wing host, and that says inflammatory things.

Any of them. Pick any of us in talk radio. Me to a much lesser degree. Not as well known. But you get the same people that think you're hateful because of the things you say. And yet, they'll make excuses and defend Kathy Griffin. She's telling the truth. She's one of the last people telling the truth.

Come on. What truth was she telling with those pictures? What truth was being told?

How was Kathy Griffin contributing to the argument that Donald Trump is a bad guy or a bad president with that picture? Do you realize -- you want to talk about propaganda. People are -- and the media reaction in the next hour, or the media reaction to the attacks in London. But one member of the media thinks that the president may be inciting attacks in America.

What do you think Kathy Griffin did? You don't think that the members -- the Islamists are going to say that there is an American woman holding the head of the dead president. That's what the Americans think of their president. You don't think that's used for propaganda with the enemy? How anybody could defend what she did is repulsive. And then, the other -- my other favorite part of this is they would then go after somebody like Ted Nugent or somebody else who said something. And at the very least, I would say to those people, what you've just said is that Kathy Griffin is no different than Ted Nugent.

Tell me what you think of Ted Nugent. Exactly. What do you think of Ted Nugent? How can you say anything different about Kathy Griffin and what she did? Except, she doubled down with a press conference. And I'll be honest, I think -- that was something contrived. To go out and blame the Trump family. Get a lawyer and say you're being bullied by the Trump family, seems to me that she is just trying to very much this as long as she can. That this now has become publicity for her.

And it has nothing to do with whether I'm a fan of her work or not. She has a right to say the things she says. But doing that, there's a backlash. There are always repercussions for what you do. And Kathy Griffin suffered repercussions. She lost her job at CNN. She got dropped by a casino. Was not going to air -- were not going to have her perform there. She lost a sponsor. What's wrong with that?

I mean, Bill O'Reilly left Fox News. And everybody said that's what happens when you behave that way. Well, there was no proof he did anything. There were a lot of accusations. He didn't go on trial for anything. His reputation was damaged. And if you listen to some people, they'll tell you that he didn't deserve to be fired. But he left.

So if there's repercussions for behavior, how could anybody argue with the repercussions that Kathy Griffin suffered? Well, the way you argue it is when you defend people you like, when you defend people that agree with you. That bad, abhorrent behavior is okay, as long as it's directed at somebody you hate. If it's somebody you like, it would be terrible.

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

PHILL MAGAKOE / Contributor | Getty Images

Kirk’s tragic death challenges us to rise above fear and anger, to rebuild bridges where others build walls, and to fight for the America he believed in.

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.

Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins.

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.

Picking up his torch

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.

Two turning points, decades apart

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.

A time for courage

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.

Glenn Beck resurrects the 9-12 Project to support Charlie Kirk's family

Glenn Beck is once again calling on his loyal listeners and viewers to come together and channel the same unity and purpose that defined the historic 9-12 Project. That movement, born in the wake of national challenges, brought millions together to revive core values of faith, hope, and charity.

Glenn created the original 9-12 Project in early 2009 to bring Americans back to where they were in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. In those moments, we weren't Democrats and Republicans, conservative or liberal, Red States or Blue States, we were united as one, as America. The original 9-12 Project aimed to root America back in the founding principles of this country that united us during those darkest of days.

This new initiative draws directly from that legacy, focusing on supporting the family of Charlie Kirk in these dark days following his tragic murder.

The revival of the 9-12 Project aims to secure the long-term well-being of Charlie Kirk's wife and children. All donations will go straight to meeting their immediate and future needs. If the family deems the funds surplus to their requirements, Charlie's wife has the option to redirect them toward the vital work of Turning Point USA.

This campaign is more than just financial support—it's a profound gesture of appreciation for Kirk's tireless dedication to the cause of liberty. It embodies the unbreakable bond of our community, proving that when we stand united, we can make a real difference.
Glenn Beck invites you to join this effort. Show your solidarity by donating today and honoring Charlie Kirk and his family in this meaningful way.

You can learn more about the 9-12 Project and donate HERE

The critical difference: Rights from the Creator, not the state

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

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.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

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.

From Muhammad to Marx

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

Gifts from God, not the state

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.

POLL: Is Gen Z’s anger over housing driving them toward socialism?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Glenn's Show Prep