'God Bless America' is the target — not Kate Smith

Wikimedia Commons

Here are a few statues that actually exist:

  • A bust of Che Guevara glaring at a hillside in Bolivia.
  • A statue of Lucifer in Madrid, Spain, and another in Belgium.
  • There are statues of Karl Marx, Stalin, and Lenin all over the world, including a statue of Lenin in Seattle.
  • Same goes for Mao Zedong, who is responsible for roughly 30 million deaths.
  • Just outside a former ghetto in Warsaw, there was a statue of Hitler kneeling in prayer. (It sold for $17 million at Christies in New York.)
  • There's a monument to a fascist soldier in Chicago that was gifted by Italian fascist dictator Benito Mussolini adored.
  • A large statue of a naked man standing on naked women in a cemetery in Brooklyn.
  • There's a statue of a policewoman urinating in Dresden, Germany.
  • There's the infamous "Manneken Pis" statue in Brussels, which features a little boy peeing into a found and is, frankly, hilarious (they dress him up in little outfits depending on the season or holidays).

RELATED: Recent Yale study proves the left's racist outrage is an act of projection

Here's a list of things that have been branded racist in the past couple of years:

  • Dogs/dog-walking.
  • 911 calls.
  • TSA's body scanners.
  • Classic literature/philosophy.
  • Milk.
  • Knitting.
  • Being cheerful.
  • Not being cheerful.
  • Friendliness.
  • Not being friendly enough.
  • Libraries.
  • Clowns.
  • The Avengers.
  • Diets.
  • Infant mortality rates (that one comes from none other than Kamala Harris, by the way, who tweeted that "implicit racial bias is one critical reason that the maternal mortality rate for Black women is three to four times higher than white women." She blamed maternal mortality rates on racism.)
  • Makeup.
  • Personal space.
  • Vikings.
  • Potatoes.
  • Inclusion.
  • Burger King commercials.
  • Okie-doke hand signs.
  • Rainbows.
  • Compliments.
  • Childbirth.
  • House plants
  • Nail polish.
  • Bacon (The New York Times made this flawless argument in an article titled "Donald Trump is Trying to Kill You").
  • Trying to improve racial tensions.
  • Not focusing constantly on racial tensions.
  • Mentioning racial tensions.
  • Existence (if white).

I could list of examples of perceived racism all day, because that seems to be the new standard: Everything is somehow racist. Every facet of life. Frankly, it's exhausting.

And, as you know, there's an incredible amount of overlap between statutes and perceived racism. I don't have to give you any examples, you already know what I'm talking about, but I will say that they've included Christopher Columbus, Thomas Jefferson, Francis Scott Key, Abraham Lincoln, and Joan of Arc, among many, many others.

The most recent example is as unexpected as the whole "walking your dogs is racist" claim. And, honestly, whoever made the claim clearly did some expert-level research. They worked really hard to find this so-called racism.

But it's also a little more nuanced than most of the above examples.

The controversy centers on a statue of Kate Smith, a singer who once called "the Songbird of the South," who gained fame in the 1940s for her rendition of "God Bless America."

Smith's achievements are awe-inspiring. She performed for King George VI and Queen Elizabeth, at the White House shortly before the start of WW2. Ronald Reagan bestowed her with the Presidential Medal of Freedom. She's been credited helping defeat the Nazis thanks to an 18-hour broadcast in which she helped CBS raise over $100 million in war bonds.

And, for decades, both the New York Yankees and the Philadelphia Flyers played her version of "God Bless America" at home games. The Yankees had featured it in during the seventh inning since 9/11. The Flyers even had a statue of Smith outside their stadium. She had become the team's good-luck charm after she performed "God Bless America" before Game Six of the 1974 Stanley Cup finals, and the Flyers won.

Suddenly, Smith became known as a racist, undeserving of a statue, destined to be canceled and forgotten.

But this month, all of that changed. Suddenly, Smith became known as a racist, undeserving of a statue, destined to be canceled and forgotten.

The statement reads:

The Flyers have enjoyed a long and popular relationship with 'God Bless America,' as performed by the late Kate Smith...But in recent days, we learned that several of the songs Kate Smith performed in the 1930s include lyrics and sentiments that are incompatible with the values of our organization, and evoke painful and unacceptable themes.

The songs?

"That's Why Darkies Were Born" and "Pickaninny Heaven."

"Pickaninny" being an archaic derogatory word to describe black children. She performed the song in the 1933 movie "Hello,

Everybody!" In the scene, she devoted the song "a lot of little colored children living in an orphanage" and sang of how "great big watermelons roll around and get in your way" and "luscious pork chop bushes bloom right outside your doorway."

As for the other song, "That's Why Darkies Were Born," well, have a listen for yourself:

Kate Smith - That's Why Darkies Were Born - 1931youtu.be

Lyrics:

Someone had to pick the cotton/Someone had to plant the corn,
Someone had to slave and be able to sing/That's why darkies were born.
Someone had to laugh at trouble/Though he was tired and worn,
Had to be contented with any old thing/That's why darkies were born.

Based on that, it looks pretty bad for poor ole Kate Smith. But, as we see more often, the cries of "racism!" are in fact deeply ignorant, based on little more than emotion and sycophantic outrage.

Because the song, "That's Why Darkies Were Born" is purely satirical, as part of the 1931 Broadway revue "George White's Scandals" as a satire of white supremacists. Smith wrote the song with Paul Robeson, actor and civil rights activist. Robeson's father was literally a runaway slave.

Worse yet, both songs came at an early point in her career, in the 1930s, a time when works of satire like these were considered controversial, even dangerous, for the opposite reason. They are just two, largely insignificant, songs of the roughly 3,000 that she recorded over the course of her career.

Kate Smith's niece told USA Today:

Aunt Kathryn really did not see color. She didn't see a person's color. She was very in tune with a person's character. I've always thought that was a model, to not see a person's color but to see their character. And this is why I'm incredibly sad.

The message is clear: the left's outrage machine knows no bounds. Anything, even the fight against actual racism, can be deemed racist.

POLL: Is Musk’s Mars dream a win or a curse for South Texas?

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.

Mark Carney's bombshell victory: Is Canada doomed under his globalist agenda?

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.

As President Trump approaches his 100th day in office, Glenn Beck joined him to evaluate his administration’s progress with a gripping new interview. April 30th is President Trump's 100th day in office, and what an eventful few months it has been. To commemorate this milestone, Glenn Beck was invited to the White House for an exclusive interview with the President.

Their conversation covered critical topics, including the border crisis, DOGE updates, the revival of the U.S. energy sector, AI advancements, and more. Trump remains energized, acutely aware of the nation’s challenges, and determined to address them.

Here are the top five takeaways from Glenn Beck’s one-on-one with President Trump:

Border Security and Cartels

DAVID SWANSON / Contributor | Getty Images

Early in the interview, Glenn asked if Trump views Mexico as a failed narco-state. While Trump avoided the term, he acknowledged that cartels effectively control Mexico. He noted that while not all Mexican officials are corrupt, those who are honest fear severe repercussions for opposing the cartels.

Trump was unsurprised when Glenn cited evidence that cartels are using Pentagon-supplied weapons intended for the Mexican military. He is also aware of the fentanyl influx from China through Mexico and is committed to stopping the torrent of the dangerous narcotic. Trump revealed that he has offered military aid to Mexico to combat the cartels, but these offers have been repeatedly declined. While significant progress has been made in securing the border, Trump emphasized that more must be done.

American Energy Revival

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s tariffs are driving jobs back to America, with the AI sector showing immense growth potential. He explained that future AI systems require massive, costly complexes with significant electricity demands. China is outpacing the U.S. in building power plants to support AI development, threatening America’s technological leadership.

To counter this, Trump is cutting bureaucratic red tape, allowing AI companies to construct their own power plants, potentially including nuclear facilities, to meet the energy needs of AI server farms. Glenn was thrilled to learn these plants could also serve as utilities, supplying excess power to homes and businesses. Trump is determined to ensure America remains the global leader in AI and energy.

Liberation Day Shakeup

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

Glenn drew a parallel between Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs and the historical post-World War II Liberation Day. Trump confirmed the analogy, explaining that his policy aims to dismantle an outdated global economic order established to rebuild Europe and Asia after the wars of the 20th century. While beneficial decades ago, this system now disadvantages the U.S. through job outsourcing, unfair trade deals, and disproportionate NATO contributions.

Trump stressed that America’s economic survival is at stake. Without swift action, the U.S. risks collapse, potentially dragging the West down with it. He views his presidency as a critical opportunity to reverse this decline.

Trouble in Europe

BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

When Glenn pressed Trump on his tariff strategy and negotiations with Europe, Trump delivered a powerful statement: “I don’t have to negotiate.” Despite America’s challenges, it remains the world’s leading economy with the wealthiest consumer base, making it an indispensable trading partner for Europe. Trump wants to make equitable deals and is willing to negotiate with European leaders out of respect and desire for shared prosperity, he knows that they are dependent on U.S. dollars to keep the lights on.

Trump makes an analogy, comparing America to a big store. If Europe wants to shop at the store, they are going to have to pay an honest price. Or go home empty-handed.

Need for Peace

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

Trump emphasized the need to end America’s involvement in endless wars, which have cost countless lives and billions of dollars without a clear purpose. He highlighted the staggering losses in Ukraine, where thousands of soldiers die weekly. Trump is committed to ending the conflict but noted that Ukrainian President Zelenskyy has been a challenging partner, constantly demanding more U.S. support.

The ongoing wars in Europe and the Middle East are unsustainable, and America’s excessive involvement has prolonged these conflicts, leading to further casualties. Trump aims to extricate the U.S. from these entanglements.