We'll Never Reach People Like Johnny Depp and His Ilk—But Here's Who We Can Reach

June 23, 2017

WRITER

How can you reach across the aisle to people like Johnny Depp, who recently went on mic to suggestively discuss assassinating the president of the United States. You can't.

"Anybody who is calling for the assassination of the president is so far past reason that we're never going to get to them . . . you're never going to talk to them," Glenn said Friday on radio.

Using a football analogy (surprise!), Glenn described the 80 percent of the country we should be trying to reach. They're the ones on both sides of the aisle that don't want chaos in the streets, buildings burning down and people being assassinated on baseball fields.

"If you're looking at a football field, that 10-yard line that all the revolutionaries are on . . . there's 10 percent of those people that are beyond reason with their anger --- ten percent on the right; ten percent on the left. Assuming that number is right, that means that there are 80 yards . . . 80 percent of the country that doesn't want to feel that way," Glenn said.

So how do we reach that 80 percent?

"We are currently talking to people that I guess you could kind of put into the behavioral scientist category, and I've been reading and reading and reading and studying and working with people trying to figure out how do we talk to the 80 percent," Glenn shared.

What it boils down to is speaking the same language.

"We have different languages, the left and the right. And it is proven . . . it goes so deep now that when we go to a grocery store, scientists can look at your grocery store record and pretty much tell who you voted for by what products you buy. We are so different. We are as different as somebody who lives in Mexico City and grew up with that lifestyle and somebody who grew up in Chicago," Glenn said.

Will we ever agree on all policy issues? Of course not. But if we learn to speak the language of the left on their playing field, we can reach common ground and learn to live as friendly neighbors again.

"Can we find and convince --- let's just say 50 percent of the country --- that saying assassination of the president is not a good thing, and we shouldn't feel that and we should stand together?" Glenn asked.

Enjoy the complimentary clip or read the transcript for details.

GLENN: When you look at somebody like Johnny Depp, you say how can we -- Glenn, you want to talk to people like Johnny Depp. No, I don't. Because anybody who is calling for the assassination of the president is so far past reason that we're never going to get to them.

How are you going to talk to the people who are shouting down and throwing Molotov cocktails? You're not. You're never going to talk to them.

PAT: There's 10 percent of both sides that --

GLENN: Yeah, aren't reachable that quite honestly want revolution or, you know, burn the whole thing down.

Well, that's not where I am. And I don't ever want to go there. And revolution never works out for the people who start the revolution. Only the American revolution in world history ended with the same guys who started it.

So it doesn't -- it's not good. And if you think that you're in pain now, wait until there is chaos in the streets and the burning down of buildings, and we assassinate 30 people on a baseball diamond. It's not going to work out well. So what happens is we're all clashing, and we're all -- we want to feel good. And when we punch the other people in the face, we actually put ourselves into that -- if you're looking at a football field, that 10-yard line that you are -- that all the revolutionaries are in and all the people who are really angry and everything else, there's 10 percent of those people that are beyond reason with their anger. 10 percent on the right. 10 percent on the left. Assuming that that number is right. That means that there is 80 yards. There's 80 percent of the country that doesn't want to feel that way.

Now, are we going to convince the 80 percent that this is where, you know, this is the right way to go? No. But can we find common ground? And I'm not saying the past policies. I'm saying to lower the temperature. Can we find and convince -- let's just say 50 percent of the country -- that saying assassination of the president is not a good thing, and we shouldn't feel that, and we should stand together.

And being these people that say there is -- "We're at civil war, and there's nothing we can do about it. It's time to punch back. It's time to have violence."

It's over if we believe that.

So I believe we should play for the rest of the field. When Walsh said "Put the ball where the other team isn't." Well, the other team's on television because they look for views, ratings, clicks. They'll put the most outrageous headline, and they'll put the most salacious story up because that's what the red meat is. That's where the real people are that are just, like, I want to eat this all day long, and I'm just so angry.

That's maybe 20 percent of the population. The rest of the population is not feeling that way. But we're being led by the 10 percent on each side. So put the ball where the other team isn't. I look at both the 10 yards on the left and the 10 yards on the right with the real radicals. That's the same team, guys. They both want revolution.

So I'm going to put the ball in the 80 percent that doesn't want any of that. And let's talk to those people and forget the others.

So I want you to know when people say to you if you would pick up this philosophy as we try to teach it over the next few months. You say how are you going to talk to those people who are out of their mind crazy?

I'm not. I'm not talking about them. I'm not going to talk to them. That's an exercise in frustration. As Paul said, say what you have to say. Love them. Serve them. Be part of the community. If they're not listening, knock the dust off your feet and move on. We can knock the dust off of our feet of those people. You're not going to talk to the Antifa people.

But if you are standing next to them and screaming back, the 80 percent in the middle.

GLENN: And you were you in with them. Because there's no real good guy there. That's why Martin Luther King won. As people were shouting, turning hoses on them, releasing dogs, what determining? He was praying for those people. He wasn't trying to shout them down because he was right, and they were wrong. That's clear. That was Malcolm X's strategy. Take them on. Martin Luther King said "No, don't take them on. Worry about the rest of the country that will see their behavior and then see our behavior and say"I want to be with those guys."

Now, when you want to talk to the 80 percent, and this is the really -- this is the really hard thing when you want to talk to the 80 percent, we are currently talking to people that I guess you could kind of put into the behavioral scientist category. And I've been reading and reading and reading and studying and working with people trying to figure out how do we talk to the 80 percent? And there are people that will say "Glenn, you can't change your language. You're going to stop talking truth. Don't -- you don't stop talking truth."

No, I know that. I know. And I would never ask anyone to do that. What I'm saying is not that we have different truths, but that we have different languages. The left and the right. And it is proven, and it goes so deep now that when we go to a grocery store, scientists can look at your grocery store record and pretty much tell who you voted for by what products you buy. We are so different. We are as different as somebody who lives in Mexico City and somebody who lives and grew up -- lives, grew up as a Mexican in Mexico City as that lifestyle. And somebody who grew up in Chicago and lives that lifestyle and speaks that language.

Yes, we're both people. Yes, we both can recognize truth. But we have so many things that we don't share that if I wanted to be a missionary, and I wanted to go down and preach the truth, whatever that truth is, God, you know, the American scripture of the constitution, whatever it is. I would not say to somebody in Chicago "Oh, you want to be a missionary? Okay. Well, don't change your language."

I'm going down to Mexico. Yeah, don't speak their language. And whatever you do when you're there, don't eat any of that -- those taco enchilada things. You make sure you're eating ribs the whole time. You get as many good Chicago deep dish pizzas. And if they're not eating that pizza, don't you talk to them. And you just keep your language.

Well, don't you think I should speak Spanish? No. God will work it out.

Well, God will work some things out and sometimes he can translate language after you do all that you can do.

We have to look at the language of the left and the right as much as the language of Spanish and English. You can find truth, the exact same truth in both languages. But you will not be able to explain the truth to somebody who speaks a different language, unless you try to speak theirs, or they try to speak yours.

Otherwise, you're just sitting around yelling at each other.

"No, I said you should eat deep dish pizza. You know, pizza."

STU: That is exactly how I feel sometimes making arguments about politics. Don't you hear what I'm saying?

GLENN: No, they don't.

STU: Limited government.

GLENN: They don't.

STU: They just don't even hear it.

GLENN: Correct. And all we do is start shouting. And then when we're saying, "No, pizza." And they're looking at us, and they're screaming something at us that may not even be about food, we get angry, and we're, like, these people are worthless. They're -- they won't even understand pizza.

[Laughter]

Okay. Well, we're not speaking the same language. They don't understand it.

STU: Human life.

GLENN: Right. Right.

STU: Are you not -- let them live.

GLENN: Babies.

STU: Alive.

PAT: Murder is not a choice.

GLENN: Okay. And that's exactly what we're doing.

'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 dangerous lie: Rights as government privileges, not God-given

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