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

Star Parker’s Impassioned Pro-Life Testimony Gets Hijacked by Unhinged Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen

November 10, 2017
Staff

WRITER

Star Parker gave an impassioned, pro-life testimony and was berated by Steve Cohen, a Democrat who represents the 9th District of Tennesee.

Parker is the founder and president of the Center for Urban Renewal and Education (CURE) and testified before a Congressional committee where she pleaded with her colleagues to seriously reconsider abortion rights reminding them it’s “leading cause of death in the black community today.”

Here’s what offended Cohen:

“In fact when you put the Dred Scott decision next to the Roe v Wadedecision, they read almost verbatim. I’d like to also address something that was brought up earlier…when it comes to mixing the abortion issue with the challenges that we face in many of our hard-hit communities. I feel it disingenuous that the issues of Medicaid would come up, and other opportunities for us to re-address what has happened in…our most distressed zip codes. The way that Planned Parenthood targets these particular zip codes with abortion. Abortion is the leading cause of death in the black community today. Since roe v wade was legalized, 20 million humans have been killed inside of the womb of black women. And then on Halloween, Planned Parenthood tweets out that the black women are safest if they abort their child rather than bring it to term. To the gentleman from Texas who brought up Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, I think that is important that we put in record that the needs of those that are most vulnerable in society cannot be addressed with abortion. Abortion feeds a narrative that women are victims, that they have no control over their sexual impulses. And the result of this narrative being forced down into our hardest-hit communities – we are seeing now recklessness in sexual activity and marriage has collapsed. In the 50s, 70% of black adults were married. Today, that number is 30 percent. This is causing a lot more social pathologies that have to be addressed in different types of legislation, not the Heartbeat Bill. The Heartbeat Bill is to protect the innocent.”

Today, Parker joined Glenn to discuss the blowback she’s received for being an African-American, anti-abortion activist. Listen to the full podcast to hear what she told Glenn.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: I swear to you -- it's like I woke up in a parallel universe. I cannot believe the conversations that we have to have today as a society. Even polite society. There is no such thing as polite society anymore.

I want to play some audio we played for you earlier this week. This was actually from a hearing on H.R.490. The Heartbeat Protection Act of 2017. And Star Parker was testifying in front of Congress. And, man, is she brave. Listen to this.

STAR: But if you also consider in your deliberations regarding H.R.490, the last time in American history that we were faced with hard Constitutional and political questions on the civil conflict between humanity and convenience, personhood and property, justice and public opinion, slavery was as abortion is, a crime against humanity.

Like slavery, tensions were created in a public square and in law concerning who qualified for natural rights worthy of protection.

In the first 89 years of our nation's existence, it was the black slave who sought freedom and equal protection under the law. And many attempts were made to heed their cry. Today, it is the concede person living in the womb of its mother that should be considered human with opportunity of equal protection under the law.

It is ironic that, while the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution in 1868 humanized slaves, the United States Supreme Court of 1973 dehumanized of the life of the being in utero, handing down a decision that wreaked in ethnic cleansing, to once again allow a powerful few to determine exactly who had a right to humanity.

GLENN: Star Parker is with us now.

How much heat are you getting, Star Parker?

STAR: Well, thank you, Glenn, for having me on. And, frankly, that is the first interview -- you are the first to actually play some of what I said in the testimony.

GLENN: Shut up.

STAR: Mostly because of what happened after.

No, seriously. So I'm listening to it saying, oh, so I did make my point.

No, what happened during the Q&A, I answered a question and then referred back to some of the discussion that was earlier, one of the congressmen.

We call him now Congressmen Coward Cohen. And because he kept throwing in welfare programs into the discussion. But he wasn't the only one. So did a protester during the time that they were actually shown an ultrasound in the hearing room, first in the history of the country. You think it would be front page news that they actually showed an ultrasound of a live, in-the-womb child in a congressional hearing.

As I said, so I then answered and addressed his promise about welfare and trying to delude what we were talking about, called it disingenuous to combine the two issues. And he lit into me. I mean, he called me ignorant. He told me that I didn't know how to address the Congress, after the hearing was over. He came up and put his finger in my face and told me I better come to his office and apologize.

GLENN: Wow.

STAR: Yeah. So that's what went viral. So what really got lost, I really appreciate you playing that, is the actual testimony. This is very serious business what we've been doing.

GLENN: Yeah. I have to tell you, Star, I am so sick of the back and forth viral bites that have nothing to do -- I'm sorry. And they will call me ignorant as well. Arguing about welfare programs when it comes to abortion is exactly the same is arguing for slavery because it will destroy the economy and people will suffer.

STAR: Right. Well, and that's why I had to address it, even though maybe I was a little out of order because he didn't ask me a specific question. But I wasn't addressing him. I was addressing the chairman who did ask me a question. Chairman of the subcommittee for the judiciary on Constitution and civil justice. Getting to what you're discussing earlier and how it's unbelievable the things that we have to now discuss in the public square, when children are listening, because of the sexual matters that are coming on to the front pages. And yet they're rooted in this abortion question.

When you're killed in the womb -- what we're doing in abortion -- let's even set aside for one moment, the moral, the medical, and the mental implications to abortion. Abortion feeds a narrative that women are just victims that can't control their impulses. They can't, as you said, learn how to say no when things are inappropriate and find the language to say, "Excuse me, sir, but this is not appropriate. So I'm leaving the room right now."

And it's because it feeds that narrative that you can't control your sexual impulses. And so now people are sexually out of control. That's why marriages have collapsed. That's why out-of-marriage births have escalated. And we, as a nation, better get a grip on this.

Otherwise, we're going to always have discussions about sexual matters and somebody else. And accusations that are coming forth, that we don't even know if are true. Like just wanted happened to the candidate who, 40 years earlier, someone said, a-ha, this is what you said to me. Who remembers what they said 40 years ago?

GLENN: So, Star, how do we -- we are entering a time -- and we -- you know, we have the oldest Congress in the history of the United States. This is the oldest Congress ever.

And we are on the -- the edge of profound technology change that is going to make us question what life even is. And I don't mean, is it life in the womb? That's a pretty easy one. Yeah.

STAR: Yeah.

GLENN: If it's a puppy when it's in the dog's womb, it's a child when it's in the human's womb. We're entering a time now where we're going to have to define life with AI. And that's going to screw everything up.

How do we get -- how do we get to a point to where we can have rational discussions that must be had now?

STAR: That is the million-dollar question. But, you know, you just brought up a fascinating point that I'm going to have to contemplate and think about later, about the oldest Congress. Because you would think there would be deep passion, since they're on the senior year, to argue for the most innocent in the womb, because they're next.

A couple of states have already passed euthanasia. We're starting to, as a culture, collapse when it comes to protecting the innocent, understanding what the Constitution really means.

But how do we get there? We may have to start over. That's why I fight a lot for school choice. We're going to have to again build a moral framework within our youth.

And the only way to do that is get you out of these cesspools that we call schools that indoctrinate them in secularism and put them in schools where they're building moral framework and integrity.

The only ones that are really trapped now in failing government schools are the very poor, the most vulnerable, who are getting lost in all of this noise. And that's why their lives are in more chaos. So how do we get back? You replace everybody in Congress.

I was surprised that after McCain lost the -- you know, the presidency when he ran. That he didn't just retire even at that age.

What is he still doing there? Why hasn't he passed the baton to younger energy? And now they can have it even over his own. The whole thing may get to the place that we were in the 1850s, to where we can't go on anymore. And end up in a real difficult direction.

GLENN: I think we're headed in that direction.

STAR: I do too.

STU: Star, your commentary was really interesting in talking about abortion, as it relates to slavery. And I think a lot of people assign their sort of moral decision-making on difficult topics like this to society. So I think even back in the day, a lot of people who probably if they really stopped and thought about it, would think, slavery is crazy. It's a crazy idea.

But since society said it was accepted and it was legal, people just sort of went along with it. It was a controversial issue, maybe. But they didn't want to talk about it in polite company.

STAR: Yeah. Same thing.

STU: Is that what you're seeing now because it's not people who are necessarily horrible people, but they want to avoid the tough sort of moral --

GLENN: Big time.

STU: -- examination of themselves to really think about whether this is right or wrong.

STAR: That's right. That's right. And not only on abortion. On many issues. But you're absolutely right. The same politicians would have it today. And, in fact, one of the things I also said in that testimony is, if you put Roe v. Wade next to Dred Scott, they read almost verbatim. They're both talking about property. They're both talking about, you know, the rights of the person who had -- the letter we hear from the left, even on abortion: Well, if you don't like it, don't have one. That's the same they were saying during slavery. Well, you don't have to own one. Yeah, well, remember, very few owned slaves.

Now, the narrative of the left is every white person is guilty of slavery because all of them had one. No, that was not true. Slavery was elite -- you had to have some money to own a slave.

Anyway, it was very controversial. But you're right. The silent majority allowed this country to go 89 years and then enter into a Civil War because they just didn't have the courage to speak up.

You're absolutely right. They knew it was wrong. And every time the Congress tried to manipulate around. It's the same way they manipulate us now around abortion.

Well, maybe we just won't let it into the (inaudible) state. Well, maybe we can just pass this bill after -- maybe we can -- no, if it is a crime against humanity, you shouldn't be doing it, and you should be doing everything you can to stop it. And that's where we are even with the abortion question today, exactly where we were with the question of slavery back in the day.

GLENN: Does it amaze you that Margaret Sanger and all the eugenicists back then that were trying to wipe out the black race, openly wipe them out, are so seemingly celebrated as friends of the black community now, that that's what they're standing up for? Oh, no. We're just trying to help the poor inner city black woman.

STAR: It's crazy. On Halloween, they tweeted out their real agenda: Black women, have an abortion. Because they're safer than having the child.

It's crazy. The first black president in the country goes to Planned Parenthood's annual celebration. The way they kill off black children in this country. Twenty million blacks have died in the womb of their mom since Roe v. Wade. And he goes. And not only he goes, but he says, God bless you.

Yeah, it's amazing how blinded people are to these facts. How is it that we allow ourselves to be complicit in abortion, with Planned Parenthood, by allowing them to get corporate welfare year after year at $520 million. It's what they're getting.

In fact, everyone you know. Everyone -- they know everyone. They know probably ten times. Might as well just hand the money straight to Planned Parenthood. Because it still wouldn't equal $520 million.

And for some reason, we want corporate welfare out of here. But that billion dollar corporation gets 520 million tax dollars every year to do their primary business, which is to kill offspring.

GLENN: Star, thank you so much. God bless. Thank you.

STU: Hmm.

Star Parker is the founder and president of the Center for Urban Renewal and Education. You can get her on Twitter @UrbanCure. UrbanCure. Or UrbanCure.org.

How America’s elites fell for the same lie that fueled Auschwitz

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

The drone footage out of Gaza isn’t just war propaganda — it’s a glimpse of the same darkness that once convinced men they were righteous for killing innocents.

Evil introduces itself subtly. It doesn’t announce, “Hi, I’m here to destroy you.” It whispers. It flatters. It borrows the language of justice, empathy, and freedom, twisting them until hatred sounds righteous and violence sounds brave.

We are watching that same deception unfold again — in the streets, on college campuses, and in the rhetoric of people who should know better. It’s the oldest story in the world, retold with new slogans.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage.

A drone video surfaced this week showing Hamas terrorists staging the “discovery” of a hostage’s body. They pushed a corpse out of a window, dragged it into a hole, buried it, and then called in aid workers to “find” what they themselves had planted. It was theater — evil, disguised as victimhood. And it was caught entirely on camera.

That’s how evil operates. It never comes in through the front door. It sneaks in, often through manipulative pity. The same spirit animates the moral rot spreading through our institutions — from the halls of universities to the chambers of government.

Take Zohran Mamdani, a New York assemblyman who has praised jihadists and defended pro-Hamas agitators. His father, a Columbia University professor, wrote that America and al-Qaeda are morally equivalent — that suicide bombings shouldn’t be viewed as barbaric. Imagine thinking that way after watching 3,000 Americans die on 9/11. That’s not intellectualism. That’s indoctrination.

Often, that indoctrination comes from hostile foreign actors, peddled by complicit pawns on our own soil. The pro-Hamas protests that erupted across campuses last year, for example, were funded by Iran — a regime that murders its own citizens for speaking freely.

Ancient evil, new clothes

But the deeper danger isn’t foreign money. It’s the spiritual blindness that lets good people believe resentment is justice and envy is discernment. Scripture talks about the spirit of Amalek — the eternal enemy of God’s people, who attacks the weak from behind while the strong look away. Amalek never dies; it just changes its vocabulary and form with the times.

Today, Amalek tweets. He speaks through professors who defend terrorism as “anti-colonial resistance.” He preaches from pulpits that call violence “solidarity.” And he recruits through algorithms, whispering that the Jews control everything, that America had it coming, that chaos is freedom. Those are ancient lies wearing new clothes.

When nations embrace those lies, it’s not the Jews who perish first. It’s the nations themselves. The soul dies long before the body. The ovens of Auschwitz didn’t start with smoke; they started with silence and slogans.

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

A time for choosing

So what do we do? We speak truth — calmly, firmly, without venom. Because hatred can’t kill hatred; it only feeds it. Truth, compassion, and courage starve it to death.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage. That’s how Amalek survives — by making you fight him with his own weapons. The only victory that lasts is moral clarity without malice, courage without cruelty.

The war we’re fighting isn’t new. It’s the same battle between remembrance and amnesia, covenant and chaos, humility and pride. The same spirit that whispered to Pharaoh, to Hitler, and to every mob that thought hatred could heal the world is whispering again now — on your screens, in your classrooms, in your churches.

Will you join it, or will you stand against it?

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

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.