Signs of Hope: A Millennial Makes Glenn's Day

June 29, 2017

WRITER

Ready for a spark of hope? Glenn spoke with Carolyn on radio today, an 18-year-old millennial who called from Pennsylvania to talk about her upbringing, interests and plans for the future. Aside from her impressive and exemplary manners, Carolyn calmly and confidently articulated her ideas with thoughtfulness and intelligence.

Speaking about her father, Carolyn had this to say:

"He really is my role model because he always lived a life, he always does live a life of integrity. You know, it's . . . sort of like in Ayn Rand's book Fountainhead, you know, he'll take whatever job necessary as long as he keeps his integrity," she said.

Carolyn also revealed that she began listening to Glenn in the fourth grade.

"She's killing me," Glenn replied.

Having just graduated from high school, Carolyn will attend Hillsdale College in the fall to study politics and history.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: America, I want to introduce you to Carolyn, as we meet for the very first time, calling from Pennsylvania.

Hello, Carolyn.

CALLER: Hi, Mr. Beck.

GLENN: How are you? You can call me Glenn. You're 19 years old?

CALLER: I'm actually 18, sir. I just graduated.

GLENN: Wow, 18. You are so polite. You were homeschooled?

CALLER: Actually no. No, sir. I went to Catholic school.

GLENN: Okay. You were -- you grew up in a military family?

CALLER: No, sir. I grew up --

GLENN: Okay. Wait. Wait. You grew -- I'm just guessing -- you grew up in the South?

CALLER: No, sir. Western PA.

STU: You're doing a good job of cold reading here.

GLENN: I've gone through everything that usually is tied directly to, yes, sir, no, sir. Where did you pick that up? It's refreshing and wonderful.

CALLER: I mean, I grew up with a father who was a small business owner, who taught his sons and daughters from a small age to go in for a strong handshake, look someone in the eye, and say, yes, sir, no, sir.

GLENN: I love your dad.

(chuckling)

CALLER: He's been a very big fan of your show.

GLENN: What does he do? What's his business?

CALLER: Well, for most of my life, my father owned furniture store companies. Though he would sell furniture to people in the local area. But after the crash in '08, you know, things got rough. And he tried and tried again to start something up. But he bit his tongue and just took a kind of different path in life.

GLENN: And what happened? He's selling drugs now?

CALLER: No. He -- he works for the state. He works for -- well, we call it PennDOT. He works for the state as a foreman.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. That must be killing him. That must be killing him.

CALLER: Yes, sir. He's part of a union. And I now kind of see it as a blessing because I now understand, you know, not just the side of the entrepreneur, but the side of the union man. And it's very humbling.

GLENN: Carolyn, I want you to close your eyes right now and put your hand on the radio, and we're going to heal your father from his deep scars. My gosh, I can't imagine what it would be like to join a union after a lifetime of working for yourself. To join a union and then -- and then PennDOT. I used to live in Pennsylvania, so I know.

CALLER: Yeah. Yeah. He really is my role model because he -- he always lived a life -- he always does live a life of integrity. You know, it's not -- sort of like in Ayn Rand's book, Fountainhead, you know, he'll take whatever job necessary as long as he keeps his integrity.

GLENN: Wow, I could talk to you all day. You make me feel good.

So, Carolyn, how can we help you?

CALLER: You posed a question yesterday of how your life has changed since 2006. But I can kind of trace it back a little bit further. I first started talking about politics when I was in kindergarten. I came home -- I came home crying on the bus in kindergarten because in 2004, no one wanted to discuss the Bush versus Gore reelection with me, and I was very, very much so at politics even at that young age. And I actually started watching your show in about fourth grade.

In fourth grade, I had received --

GLENN: She's killing me.

CALLER: Yeah. I had received a B in I think it was my reading class, and so I wasn't allowed to watch TV for the rest of the school year. So every night, my dad would let me sneak in and watch Bill O'Reilly's show, which really got me started. And after that, I would come home after school every day and sit and watch your show at 5 o'clock exactly.

GLENN: Wow. Thank you so much. So that has -- that has damaged you and oppressed you.

CALLER: No. No, sir.

GLENN: Or?

CALLER: It's definitely taught me the importance of principles. You know, I know today in the political climate we live in, especially as a young student, it's hard to -- to be able to see right versus left because it seems as though politics infiltrates not just culture, but the classroom. And what I've learned over time is that, yes, people who are liberals can be friends with conservatives.

The key is that you stand on principles. And not rhetoric. I know after the very -- very scary shooting last week of -- at Capitol Hill, I texted a lot of my -- my more liberal friends, you know, who supported Bernie Sanders, voted for Clinton. And I just said, "Hey, I'm someone who stands on the principle of individuality. And I know that just because one Bernie Sanders supporter did such a terrible act, that does not make all Bernie Sanders supporters terrible people." And I just wanted to remind them that. And that I loved them.

GLENN: And what was their response?

CALLER: A lot of them were just so grateful that I gave -- that I showed love. And they said, Carolyn, you've taught me that not all Trump supporters are KKK members. Or not all Trump supporters are Nazis. Because if you don't show love and reach out during those moments, it would be easy to let the status quo persist. And I just wanted to be able to show, you know, just little acts of live. And it does change people's minds rather quickly when you do that.

GLENN: You know, it's funny, I was having dinner last night with some Silicon Valley and some Hollywood lefties. And as we were -- we were talking, a couple of them sounded very much like people that -- one person in particular that I spoke to yesterday to, on the radio, a woman called, and she was very animated. And felt that --

CALLER: Sir.

GLENN: I was, you know, betraying the cause by -- by saying that we have to be -- we have to change our language and we have to be very aware of how we're talking. Because we can make an impact for the good as opposed to just building up more walls.

And -- and most of the people that were at dinner with me last night, they felt the same way. And they were looking for a way to start talking to people. And not necessarily about politics. Just talking to people. And one of the guys said something along the lines of, you know, we need to fix things politically. We need the government to -- to fix all of these things. And, you know, the language is not going to break through.

And I have found -- I mean, I -- I am sitting with you guys. Because I changed my language. And I haven't changed a thing in my policy and my principles. But we're talking. So how can you not say that it doesn't work? It does.

CALLER: I -- I -- I whole-heartedly agree with you, sir. I think it's very interesting that you're discussing, you know, the idea of care versus harm, liberty and oppression. Because last summer I was actually sitting in a lecture where we were discussing, you know, political campaigning and the such. And the speaker put up on the screen this chart about how liberals use certain words and they react to certain words versus conservatives. And it was the same kind of idea of liberty, care, harm, justice.

GLENN: Yes.

CALLER: And I just sat there, and I thought, you know, that's it. That's the secret.

And so ever since then, I've been able to engage some of my liberal friends on things such as Planned Parenthood and being pro-life and really some hot button topics. But if you go in and speak the language and you go in with genuine love and intellectual curiosity, which most of my liberal friends are curious, they want to know what a conservative believes. Why we believe what we believe. They don't just want to label everyone. They do want to know. And if you go in from that approach, they are much more open and much more understanding. They may not change their minds, but they want to understand, the same way we should want to understand.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. And it's really amazing -- and I have example after example after example of this -- people don't know how to be able to have that dialogue. But they want that dialogue. And if you will model it, they will fall into it.

And it's -- you know, the -- one of the -- one of the guys that was there last night said, you know, I read a book. And he said, "It totally changed my mind. Totally changed my mind."

CALLER: Yeah.

GLENN: And he said, "It is the Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt."

CALLER: Hmm.

GLENN: Which is the book that really takes the care and harm and liberty and oppression and is teaching me -- has totally changed the way I view things. And you can. I spoke at a table with 20 Silicon Valley liberals last night. One Libertarian.

And we spoke about abortion. And I talked about how they see oppression of women, and they all shook their heads. And I said, "We see sanctity." And I could feel their eyes roll up. And I said, and that's a word that you guys don't speak. So let's just talk about harm to women. And we had this conversation.

And it was -- I don't know if anybody changed their mind or anything, but at least it didn't devolve into where it usually devolves.

I mean, one of the guys who was with me, he sat back from the table, and he said -- I said, "What did you notice about things?" And he said, "I was watching people and listening." And he said, "As you were speaking, I heard so many people say, huh. Wow."

JEFFY: Yeah.

GLENN: And that's the beginning of it. Just opening people's minds to, that's not what I thought at all.

CALLER: Yeah. Exactly. And I think as soon as -- as soon as that spark kind of goes off in someone's mind and the wheels start to turn -- it's not that you should go in with the approach of you want to change their mind, but you just want to understand and they want to understand, that's when real change happens.

GLENN: Yeah. The problems that I have with talking people is when they say, "How do you win?" Or they're trying to win the argument.

There's no -- Martin Luther King said -- and he is absolutely right. Winning assumes that there's going to be a loser. And you want everyone walking from the table feeling that they've -- that they've won, that they've reconciled with somebody else.

CALLER: Exactly.

GLENN: Because we're going to have to -- if you play this out in your head -- if the Democrats get absolutely everything that they want, and let's say they rule for the next 20 years and they get this socialist utopia. Well, there are going to be people like me and maybe you that -- no. Never. I'm not going there. I won't buy into it. I'm not going to speak that language. I'm not -- I will not go over the cliff with the rest of humanity because it's easier. I will stand for what I believe is the truth.

So what do they do with that ten to 30 percent of that population that doesn't comply? Well, usually, it's round them up and kill them or put them in a training camp or whatever.

That's what happens. And the same would happen if you are a big government person on the right. What are you going to do with the people that disagree with you that will never change their mind? You have to reconcile with them and live in peace. And that has to be done before we talk about any policies. We have to start trusting each other.

Carolyn, quickly, what do you want to do for a living?

CALLER: I've not thought that far. I will be attending Hillsdale College in the fall, where I'll be studying politics and history.

GLENN: Good choice.

CALLER: And I know I -- I joke with my mother, I was adopted from South Korea -- so I can't run for president. But I love to joke with my parents that I would like to find a way to be First Lady.

GLENN: Oh, that's great.

CALLER: The same way Jackie Kennedy went in and sort of restored the White House with interior design. I would say I would like to restore it with making it the people's house again. Allowing -- allowing people from all over the country to come in and, you know, have lunch with the president or the First Lady and just spend hours talking and really knowing what they want to hear.

GLENN: Carolyn, I would love to spend more time with you. I would like to have our producers grab your phone number. I would like to have you on at least once a year to see that you have held the course all the way through school. And if you're ever looking for an internship, I would love to have you intern directly with me. So I want to put you on hold. We'll get the phone numbers. Thank you so much. And say hello to your father and your mother.

CALLER: Thank you, sir.

Silent genocide exposed: Are christians being wiped out in 2025?

Aldara Zarraoa / Contributor | Getty Images

Is a Christian Genocide unfolding overseas?

Recent reports suggest an alarming escalation in violence against Christians, raising questions about whether these acts constitute genocide under international law. Recently, Glenn hosted former U.S. Army Special Forces Sniper Tim Kennedy, who discussed a predictive model that forecasts a surge in global Christian persecution for the summer of 2025.

From Africa to Asia and the Middle East, extreme actions—some described as genocidal—have intensified over the past year. Over 380 million Christians worldwide face high levels of persecution, a number that continues to climb. With rising international concern, the United Nations and human rights groups are urging protective measures by the global community. Is a Christian genocide being waged in the far corners of the globe? Where are they taking place, and what is being done?

India: Hindu Extremist Violence Escalates

Yawar Nazir / Contributor | Getty Images

In India, attacks on Christians have surged as Hindu extremist groups gain influence within the country. In February 2025, Hindu nationalist leader Aadesh Soni organized a 50,000-person rally in Chhattisgarh, where he called for the rape and murder of all Christians in nearby villages and demanded the execution of Christian leaders to erase Christianity. Other incidents include forced conversions, such as a June 2024 attack in Chhattisgarh, where a Hindu mob gave Christian families a 10-day ultimatum to convert to Hinduism. In December 2024, a Christian man in Uttar Pradesh was attacked, forcibly converted, and paraded while the mob chanted "Death to Jesus."

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommends designating India a "Country of Particular Concern" and imposing targeted sanctions on those perpetrating these attacks. The international community is increasingly alarmed by the rising tide of religious violence in India.

Syria: Sectarian Violence Post-Regime Change

LOUAI BESHARA / Contributor | Getty Images

Following the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024, Syria has seen a wave of sectarian violence targeting religious minorities, including Christians, with over 1,000 killed in early 2025. It remains unclear whether Christians are deliberately targeted or caught in broader conflicts, but many fear persecution by the new regime or extremist groups. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a dominant rebel group and known al-Qaeda splinter group now in power, is known for anti-Christian sentiments, heightening fears of increased persecution.

Christians, especially converts from Islam, face severe risks in the unstable post-regime environment. The international community is calling for humanitarian aid and protection for Syria’s vulnerable minority communities.

Democratic Republic of Congo: A "Silent Genocide"

Hugh Kinsella Cunningham / Stringer | Getty Images

In February 2025, the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), an ISIS-affiliated group, beheaded 70 Christians—men, women, and children—in a Protestant church in North Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo, after tying their hands. This horrific massacre, described as a "silent genocide" reminiscent of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, has shocked the global community.

Since 1996, the ADF and other militias have killed over six million people, with Christians frequently targeted. A Christmas 2024 attack killed 46, further decimating churches in the region. With violence escalating, humanitarian organizations are urging immediate international intervention to address the crisis.

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.

Glenn's Show Prep