RADIOFebruary 24, 2025

Bud Light Insider Reveals What Led to Dylan Mulvaney Controversy

The American pushback against wokeness really took off after the Bud Light-Dylan Mulvaney controversy. But how did that partnership even happen? How did the working man’s beer go work? Glenn speaks with Bud Light insider Anson Frericks, who is the former president of Anheuser-Busch Sales & Distribution Co. and saw the company’s culture shift firsthand. He lays it out in his new book, “Last Call for Bud Light.” And he tells Glenn that the driving force behind the wokeness wasn’t business data or the will of customers. It was major shareholders like BlackRock, who pushed the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset principles. So, now that Trump is pushing back against the ”ESG Industrial Complex,” he argues, many CEOs are abandoning these failed policies.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Anson Frericks, I think I have his name right. He's the author of a new book called Last Call for Bud Light.

He was -- he is the Strive asset manager cofounder. He is with Vivek Ramaswamy.

He has written a great book that I think everybody should read. Anson, welcome to the program!

ANSON: Thanks for having me this morning, Glenn. Really excited to be on the show.

GLENN: Oh, you bet. Your book is fascinating. It's a great, great business book. To kind of get into how a great brand is built. And how it's dismantled. And how it went horribly, horribly wrong.

ANSON: Yeah. You know, Glenn, it's really interesting.

If you think about all the pushback on ESG and DEI, and really just, in my mind, it really started with the collapse of Bud Light.

That's when I think you had all these regular, everyday folks that were saying, man, you know, you act like you did not like when the NFL and all the players kneeling. Yeah, I hated it when Disney got involved in the parental rights issues. But, man, when Bud Light, which is the working man, everyday citizen beer, when all of a sudden, they're promoting Dylan Mulvaney, and everything going on with Dylan Mulvaney, that's when I think people said enough is enough. They stopped buying the beer.

Customers left by the millions. The stock price cratered. It's crazy that they still haven't figured out, and there hasn't been a comeback at all.

GLENN: You know, I wrote a book a few years ago, about The Great Reset.

ANSON: Yeah.

GLENN: And how that was changing everything. And all of these companies would be beholden, not to you, the consumer, but would be beholden to people like BlackRock. And as I'm reading your book, I'm like, yes. Yes.

I can't believe how right we were. Because that's really what seemed to have happened. The culture changed. You moved from St. Louis to New York.

You started caring about BlackRock. Not the consumer.

And you were there, watching this happening, knowing what was coming. Or at least it seems that you really kind of knew what was coming.

ANSON: Yeah. No. Absolutely. And, Glenn, you were ahead of everybody on this. With the Great Reset, the phenomenal book on your end. And seeing what's happening. When you have the World Economic Forum. Klaus Schwab, and all these individuals that were pushing more for this European form of corporate governance. Stakeholder capitalism. Companies. They're supposed to create value for all stakeholders. Which is very distinct. For the American -- Milton Friedman view of the world, that said, you have to put the shareholders first, and you have to do what's right for the shareholders, which is create products, services, that actually create more sustainable businesses.

But as many corporations over the last five to ten years adopted this Klaus Schwab, European fake order view, which was foisted on them by the BlackRock world, who were taking money from very progressive pension funds in California, in New York, and in European sovereign wealth funds. We saw this as the least sustainable thing that a business can do. Is try to get involved in all these political and social issues.

GLENN: Right.

ANSON: To fracture your customer base. It's bad.

GLENN: Was that something that you think these business leaders actually believed in? Or were they just saying, hey, it's a new world. And everybody has to do this. Or we're not going to get the money from the banks.

And we're not going to get the funding that we need, et cetera, et cetera.

ANSON: Yeah. I don't think many of these people believed in these programs. But unfortunately, they were foisted by them, by the black rocks. The state streets. And the Vanguards.

They're the single largest shareholders in most of these companies. And then you have this whole ESG industrial complex, built around this.

McKinsey. One of the most influential management consulting companies, had their diversity matters. Diversity wins.

DEI studies, that told companies that they needed to improve their DEI. And, of course, they could hire McKinsey for millions of dollars to figure out how to do that. You had the human rights, which is this activist non-profit organization, that started scoring companies. You know, you talk a lot about the social credit scores. Human rights campaigns are doing to the companies that's shaming them, if they didn't have the right transgender policies in place. If they didn't have the right amount of advertising to the LGBTQ+ community. I mean, there was this whole complex that was built up.

That's why I think you were starting to see a lot of CEOs backtrack on these policies. They had nothing to do with actually creating more value for the shareholders, or actually promoting the business.

It was all about promoting the political agenda. I think most of them didn't want to believe in, but they were most compelled and forced to do over the last couple of years.

GLENN: So the Bud Light, you know, the end of, I think, I agree with you, the end of ESG. At least not -- at least the end of it being the knee-jerk reaction of, no. Of course, we have to have transgender people in every commercial.

The end of that, yeah. I'm reading your book, last night.

And I'm like, okay.

I think maybe -- maybe we've hit the end of this. Maybe this is the beginning of looking back and saying, look how insane all of this was.

Are we on sure footing now, leaving that time period? Or is it still a real lurking danger?

ANSON: No. I think the pendulum is definitely swinging back. You really see businesses dividing in two camps. You have certain companies that have realized, that these policies have failed. And they want to get back to the bottom line. You've seen companies like Meta and Walmart and Tractor Supply Company and a bunch of other people that hold back their programs. But then you have companies that are more in progressive cities. I mean, Costco has doubled down. Costco is based out of Seattle. They're doubling down on their DEI programs.

You have other companies, and I talk about this a lot. But even Anheuser-Busch, which is owned by a Belgium corporation called InBev, that they haven't necessarily publicly backed down. It's just the company that lost the most from this whole movement. And they still haven't publicly backtracked, even though a lot of their American counterparts have. Because, again, they are owned by a European company that promotes more of these -- more of these values. And I think that's where you're starting to see this divide.

And the companies that continue to hold on for to, I think the DEI and ESG philosophies are going to continue to fall behind their American counterparts.

GLENN: So how much of a role did just being out of step, with the Bud Light customer. How much of that played a role before ESG. I mean, if you don't understand the Clydesdales. You don't -- you don't get Budweiser. Would you agree with that?

ANSON: You know, 100 percent, I think there was a dangerous cocktail that was mixing for almost ten years at Anheuser-Busch. And we kind of found this firsthand. So going back, Anheuser-Busch was created by an American family, by the Busch family. It was taken over by a European company called InBev in 2008. And InBev was based in Belgium, and then it was also run by a couple of Brazilian individuals. And they came here to the US. And over 5 years, really dismantled what Anheuser-Busch was.

Even including in the year 2015, they moved the corporate headquarters from St. Louis to Missouri.

And they thought they couldn't have the right talent in -- in -- in St. Louis. They couldn't attract the right people. Even though, St. Louis, Missouri, they had great talent that built this company, essentially the world's largest beer company.

GLENN: Oh, yeah, Anheuser-Busch, St. Louis, Missouri. You heard that your life.

ANSON: That's it. So they moved from the epicenter, away from the middle of the country.

Where there's always a saying -- you know, generally placed for American. Peoria, Illinois, is very close to St. Louis. You have all of a microcosm of the US around there.

Which helps you understand the center of the US.

When you move to New York. You hire New York agencies. New York marketing. New York folks. That has really changed.

I think the outlook of the company, combine that with the rise of really ESG and DEI, which really took off, in that 2015 to 2021, 2022 time frame made for a dangerous cocktail, that they just lost who their customer was. And who that core American beer drinker was.

GLENN: I have to tell you, one of the best parts has nothing to do with ESG, of the book. Is moving the company to New York. Because I moved my company out of New York. But at first I left the -- the headquarters in New York. And the company really split. You know, once a founder leaves, things can go awry quickly. And especially if you're in New York, and the founder is in Texas. And we really had some really tough times, because of that. And I -- you know, businesspeople, I hope they -- I hope they recognize the effect. But in your book, it shows, a company like InBev could not. It didn't get that at all.

ANSON: No. They didn't really get it at all. I saw firsthand, the company changing. You read more about this, in the book last call for Bud Light. One of the things I was frustrated with, especially in the 2020, 2021 time frame, after COVID, after George Floyd. And the company which was this meritocracy. That's what I joined. Hey, if you work hard, you get promoted. And one of the key principles of the company was, we promote based off the results you get. And all of a sudden that principle was changed to, we promote based off the diversity of your team.

Then you sort of have diversity dashboards coming in. To see the diversity of your team. On top of that, we couldn't even just get partnerships done. I thought that made tons of sense.

I talk about this in the book a lot. I tried to do a distribution agreement with Black Rifle Coffee Company. And you probably Black Rifle Coffee company, its mission is to serve culture and coffee to firefighters, first responders, police, people who love America.

But that was too controversial of a partnership in 2021 and early 2022.

GLENN: That's crazy!

ANSON: And for me -- for me, it was kind of our external affairs team in New York. They essentially scuddled this deal based off their own political leanings. I said, guys, the same person drinking a six pack of Budweiser at night is the same person drinking six cups of Black Rifle Coffee Company the next morning.

GLENN: Yes.

ANSON: And what do you mean we can't do a distribution deal, where we're putting the same Black Rifle Coffee cans on the Budweiser trucks? This makes sense for everybody.

But that was too controversial of a partnership. And that's where you saw just that center of gravity, when you're looking at America through the lens of Fifth Avenue in New York, versus St. Louis Missouri, where I think you really lose sight of who your customer is.

GLENN: You know, when you talk about how Bud Light sent that can to Dylan Mulvaney, that may surpass. In fact, I think it does, surpass the boob move of, we've reinvented our recipe. Now it's the new Coke!

I mean, just dumb as a box of rocks. You say, I -- you outline clearly how bad it was for Anheuser-Busch, but the average person, I think would think that Bud Light has kind of recovered, and that's kind of past. But that's not true!

ANSON: No, I mean, it really hasn't.

You know, I get into this in the book a lot. About that same organization, that same sort of external affairs team that canceled that Black Rifle Coffee deal. They were the one that green lit the Dylan Mulvaney partnership.

And unlike the Coca-Cola. Coca-Cola, they were in the state. But what do they do? They took accountability for it? Did they apologize for it?

GLENN: Right.

ANSON: They killed new Coke, I don't know, within a couple of months.

GLENN: Oh, yeah.

ANSON: One of the big problems. You make bad, bone-headed marketing mistakes regularly in business. The real problem here is, yes, the marketing decision was wrong. But even more importantly, the company's response to it is the reason, Glenn. Like sales are still down 40 percent, 50 percent.

They still lost $40 billion of value, and have not recovered before this. Because the company never took responsibility and accountability, and has not made any changes. The same CEO is still there. They still have not come out. They rolled back publicly DEI policies. They haven't apologized to their loyal customer base. And they haven't been able to admit, and say, we screwed up.

And I think part of it is, is because of this kind of European ownership they have. And, you know, my feeling is that they're not going to actually get their Bud Light customers back, no matter how much money they throw at it. Dana White, the ultimate fighting championship, which I think they gave him $100 million. They have Shane Gillis, they have others. Because the real path to redemption, I mean, goes through forgiveness. You know this. But the only way to be forgiven is actually to admit there was a mistake and there was an area. And they have yet to do that. Until they do that, I don't think a lot of these customers are coming back, no matter what marketing you give folks.

GLENN: So the name of the book is last call for Bud Light. The fall and future of America's favorite beer. I need to take a one-minute break and then come back. And I want to talk to you about what does the future look like, and not necessarily for Budweiser.

I mean, you are -- you cofounded strive asset management with Vivek. A good friend and a really smart guy. Who I think has a really bright future. And so you're looking at these companies and trying to find the right companies that align with the values of their customers.

Tell me, the advice that you give for companies, now that are still kind of in this weird zone. What the future looks like. And what is the path forward?

GLENN: If -- if I could catch hope in a jar and put a lid on it. And give it away, I would. Our nation has been far too short on hope. Especially when will it comes to the economy and our personal ways.

Maybe things are finally starting to get better. Maybe we will have more trouble before it gets better. We have a lot of debt we have to pay.

We made a lot of really bad mistakes. But now that we have good leadership in office, you know, it's going to be a little less worrisome, maybe.

A little more hope.

But you are still in charge of your own personal economy.

Here's the hope I can give you. A sincere recommendation to give American Financing a call. Because they work for you, not the bank. They're salaried employees. When they -- when you call them. They will shoot straight with you. Maybe take ten minutes just to get started. And they are saving the average listener of this program, just around an average of, what? $836 a month.

That's like giving yourself a 10,000-dollar raise. That's a little -- that's a little deposit in the hope bank, isn't it? Start today. You might even be able to delay up to two mortgage payments, which can help get you even further ahead.

Don't take my word for it. I always tell you, and I mean it every time. Do your own homework.
Don't take anybody's word for it. You're smart enough to figure out if it's right for you.

American Financing. 800-906-2440. 800-906-2440, or go to AmericanFinancing.net.
Ten-second station ID.
(music)

GLENN: So what do you see as the current situation, and the path forward in the next three to four years, for American companies and brands?

ANSON: Yeah, so it's funny. I left one year before that Dylan Mulvaney partnership, after they wouldn't let me do the Black Rifle Deal.
I saw the company changing from a diversity standpoint. And Vivek and I, we started a company called Strive Asset management. Which was, we were going to invest everyday citizen dollars into businesses and have them be focused once again on meritocracy. Have them be focused on their mission.

Don't necessarily get involved in a lot of political and social issues, like we saw. I was looking Atlanta, Georgia.

If you remember, Glenn, in 2021, when the governor passed the Georgia rights act. You have to have an ID to vote.

And corporate America lost. BlackRock. One of the companies said, we're pushing back against it. Then they kind of compelled Coca-Cola, Delta to get involved in this pushback. And Major League Baseball cancelled the All-Star Game.

In 2021, in Atlanta, over this Georgia voting rights. You need to have an ID to vote. So we saw a lot of these problems happening. And we came out, and we said we're going to start a new asset manager, compete against BlackRock.

Let's have companies just focus on whatever their mission is. Stay out of politics. That will be good for business, because you will not fracture your customer base, and it will be good for our democracy as well. Because we should have individuals -- are the ones that should be deciding what rules they live by, not these secret national organizations or ESG-promoting asset managers. It's funny.

When we originally launched, this is not even a contrarian position. But this was almost like a subversive position 20 years ago. People called us anti-ESG, anti-DEI, anti-woke. I mean, you name it.

GLENN: Anti-everything.

ANSON: Anti-everything, and I said, guys, we are just pro-American, free market shareholder capitalism. That's what we are pro. We are anti-European stakeholder capitalism. We're anti-the World Economic One. We're anti-the European agendas, yes, we are. But we're very much pro-American. Free market shareholder capitalism.

And there are a lot of people that wouldn't even work with us. Marketing agencies wouldn't work with us. People wouldn't engage with us early on.

And it's so funny now, because now three years later, what was a very contrarian idea has become very mainstream, and the pendulum again has swung back for most of corporate America, who has now -- who has now once again been able to focus on the business.

GLENN: I think this is a book for every businessperson, even just someone who has watched Anheuser-Busch through the years. It's an amazing story, and something that every businessman should read, going forward. Last Call for Bud Light. The fall and future of America's favorite beer. Anson, thank you so much. God bless.

ANSON: Thanks, Glenn.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

Max Lucado & Glenn Beck: Finding unity in faith

Glenn Beck sits down with beloved pastor and author Max Lucado for a deep conversation about faith, humility, and finding unity in a divided world. Together, they reflect on the importance of principles over politics, why humility opens the door to true dialogue, and how centering life on God brings clarity and peace. Lucado shares stories of faith, the dangers of a “prosperity gospel,” and the powerful reminder that life is not about making a big deal of ourselves, but about making a big deal of God. This uplifting conversation will inspire you to re-center your life, strengthen your faith, and see how humility and love can transform even the most divided times.

Watch Glenn Beck's FULL Interview with Max Lucado HERE

Bill O'Reilly predicts THIS will be Charlie Kirk's legacy

Bill O’Reilly joins Glenn Beck with a powerful prediction about Charlie Kirk’s legacy. Evil tried to destroy his movement, Bill says, but – as his new book, “Confronting Evil,” lays out – evil will just end up destroying itself once more…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Mr. Bill O'Reilly, welcome to the program, how are you, sir?

BILL: Good, Beck, thanks for having me back. I appreciate it. How have you been?

GLENN: Last week was really tough. I know it was tough for you and everybody else.

But, you know -- I haven't -- I haven't seen anything.

BILL: Family okay? All of that?

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. Family is okay. Family is okay.

BILL: Good question good. That's the most important thing.

GLENN: It is.

So, Bill, what do you make of this whole Charlie Kirk thing. What happened, and where are we headed?

BILL: So my analysis is different for everybody else, and those that know me for so long. About a year ago, I was looking for a topic -- it was a contract to do another book. And I said, you know what's happening in America, and around the world. Was a rise in evil. It takes a year to research and write these books.

And not since the 1930s, had I seen that happen, to this extent. And in the 1930s, of course, you would have Tojo and Hitler and Mussolini and Franco and all these guys. And it led to 100 million dead in World War II. The same thing, not to the extent.

But the same thing was --
GLENN: Yet.
BILL: -- bubbling in the world, and in the United States.

I decided to write a book. The book comes out last Tuesday. And on Wednesday, Putin lobs missiles into Poland.

Ultra dangerous.

And a few hours later, Charlie Kirk is assassinated.

And one of the interviewers said to me last week, your -- your book is haunting. Is haunting.

And I think that's extremely accurate. Because that's what evil does.

And in the United States, we have so many distractions. The social media.

People create around their own lives.

Sports. Whatever it may be. That we look away.

Now, Charlie Kirk was an interesting fellow. Because at a very young age, he was mature enough to understand that he wanted to take a stand in favor of traditional America and Judeo Christian philosophy.

He decided that he wanted to do that.

You know, and when I was 31 or whatever, I was lucky I wasn't in the penitentiary. And I believe you were in the penitentiary.
(laughter)
So he was light years ahead of us.

GLENN: Yes, he was.

BILL: And he put it into motion. All right? Now, most good people, even if you disagree with what Mr. Kirk says on occasion, you admire that. That's the spirit of America. That you have a belief system, that you go out and try to promote that belief system, for the greater good of the country. That's what it is.

That's what Charlie Kirk did.

And he lost his life.

By doing it!

So when you essentially break all of this down. You take the emotion away, all right?

Which I have to do, in my job. You see it as another victory for evil.

But it really isn't.

And this is the ongoing story.

This is the most important story. So when you read my book, Confronting Evil, you'll see that all of these heinous individuals, Putin's on the cover. Mao. Hitler.

Ayatollah Khomeini. And then there are 14 others inside the book. They all destroy themselves.

Evil always destroys itself. But it takes so many people with it. So this shooter destroyed his own family.

And -- and Donald Trump, I talked to him about it last week in Yankee stadium. And Trump is a much different guy than most people think.

GLENN: He is.

JASON: He destroyed his own mother and father and his two brothers.

That's what he did. In addition to the Kirk family!

So evil spreads. Now, if Americans pay attention and come to the conclusion that I just stated, it will be much more difficult for evil to operate openly.

And that's what I think is going to happen.

There's going to be a ferocious backlash against the progressive left in particular.

To stop it, and I believe that is what Mr. Kirk's legacy is going to be.

GLENN: I -- I agree with you on all of these fronts.

I wonder though, you know, it took three, or if you count JFK, four assassinations in the '60s, to confront the evil if you will.

Before people really woke up and said, enough is enough!

And then you have the big Jesus revolution after that.

Is -- I hate to say this. But is -- as far gone as we are, is one assassination enough to wake people up?

JOHN: Some people. Some people will never wake up.

They just don't want to live in the real world, Beck. And it's never been easier to do that with the social media and the phones and the computers.

And you're never going to get them back.

But you don't need them. So let's just be very realistic here on the Glenn Beck show.

Let's run it down.

The corporate media is finished.

In America. It's over.

And you will see that play out the next five years.

Because the corporate media invested so much of its credibility into hating Donald Trump.

And the hate is the key word.

You will find this interesting, Beck. For the first time in ten years, I've been invited to do a major thing on CBS, today.

I will do it GE today. With major Garrett.

GLENN: Wow.

BILL: Now, that only happened because Skydance bought CBS. And Skydance understands the brand CBS is over, and they will have to rehabilitate the whole thing. NBC has not come to that conclusion yet, but it will have to.

And ABC just does the weather. I mean, that's all they care about. Is it snowing in Montana? Okay? The cables are all finished. Even Fox.

Once Trump leaves the stage, there's nowhere for FNC to go. Because they've invested so much in Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump.

So the fact of the matter is, the corporate media is over in America. That takes a huge cudgel out of the hands of the progressive movement.

Because the progressive movement was dependent on the corporate media to advance its cause. That's going to end, Beck.

GLENN: Well, I would hope that you're right.

Let me ask you about --

BILL: When am I wrong?

When am I wrong?

You've known me for 55 years. When have I been wrong?

GLENN: Okay. All right. All right. We're not here to argue things like that.

So tell me about Skydance. Because isn't Skydance Chinese?

BILL: No! It's Ellison. Larry Ellison, the second richest guy in the world. He owns Lanai and Hawaii, the big tech guy and his son is running it.

GLENN: Yeah, okay.

I though Skydance. I thought that was -- you know them.

BILL: Yeah.

And they -- they're not ideological, but they were as appalled as most of us who pay attention at the deterioration of the network presentations.

So --

GLENN: You think that they could.

BILL: 60 Minutes used to be the gold standard.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

BILL: And it just -- it -- you know, you know, I don't know if you watch it anymore.

GLENN: I don't either.

So do you think they can actually turn CBS around, or is it just over?

BILL: I don't know. It's very hard to predict, because so many people now bail. I've got a daughter 26, and a son, 22.

They never, ever watched network television.

And you've got -- it's true. Right?

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

They don't watch --

BILL: They're not going to watch The Voice. The dancing with this. The juggling with that. You know, I think they could do a much better job in their news presentations.

GLENN: Yeah. Right.

BILL: Because what they did, is banish people like Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly.

Same voices, with huge followings.

Huge!

All right?

We couldn't get on there.

That's why Colbert got fired. Because Colbert wouldn't -- refused to put on any non-progressive voice, when they were talking about the country.

GLENN: I know.

BILL: Well, it's not -- I'm censoring it.

GLENN: Yeah, but it's not that he was fired because he wouldn't do that. He was fired because that led to horrible ratings. Horrible ratings.

BILL: Yes, it was his defiance.

GLENN: Yes.

BILL: Fallon has terrible ratings and so does Kimmel. But Colbert was in your face, F you, to the people who were signing his paycheck.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

BILL: Look, evil can only exist if the mechanisms of power are behind it.

And that's when you read the front -- I take them one by one. And Putin is the most important chapter by far.

GLENN: Why?

BILL: Because Putin would use nuclear weapon.

He wouldn't. He's a psychopath.

And I'm -- on Thursday night, I got a call from the president's people saying, would I meet the president at Yankee stadium for the 9/11 game?

And I said, when a president calls and asks you to meet them, sure.

GLENN: I'll be there. What time?

BILL: It will take me three days to get into Yankee stadium, on Long Island. But I'll start now.

GLENN: Especially because the president is coming. But go ahead.

BILL: Anyway, that was a very, I think that Mr. Trump values my opinion. And it was -- we did talk about Putin.

And the change in Putin. And I had warned him, that Putin had changed from the first administration, where Trump controlled Putin to some extent.

Now he's out of control. Because that's what always happens.

GLENN: Yeah.

BILL: It happened with Hitler. It happened with Mao. It happened with the ayatollah. It happened with Stalin. Right now. They get worse and worse and worse and worse. And then they blow up.

And that's where Putin is! But he couldn't do any of that, without the assent of the Russian people. They are allowing him to do this, to kill women and children. A million Russian casualties for what! For what! Okay?

So that's why this book is just in the stratosphere. And I was thinking object, oh. Because people want to understand evil, finally. Finally.

They're taking a hard look at it, and the Charlie Kirk assassination was an impetus to do that.

GLENN: Yeah. And I think it's also an impetus to look at the good side.

I mean, I think Charlie was just not a neutral -- a neutral character. He was a force for good. And for God.

And I think that -- that combination is almost the Martin Luther King combination. Where you have a guy who is speaking up for civil rights.

But then also, speaking up for God. And speaking truth, Scripturally.

And I think that combination still, strangely, I wouldn't have predicted it. But strangely still works here in America, and I think it's changed everything.

Bill, it's always food to talk to you. Thank you so much for being on. I appreciate it.

It's Bill O'Reilly. The name of the book, you don't want to miss. Is confronting evil. And he takes all of these really, really bad guys on. One by one. And shows you, what happens if you don't do something about it. Confronting evil. Bill O'Reilly.

And you can find it at BillO'Reilly.com.

The difference between debate and celebrating death

There’s a big difference between firing someone, like a teacher, for believing children shouldn’t undergo trans surgery and firing a teacher who celebrated the murder of Charlie Kirk. Glenn Beck explains why the latter is NOT “cancel culture.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I got an email from somebody that says, Glenn, in the wake of Charlie's assassination, dozens of teachers, professors and professionals are being suspended or fired for mocking, or even celebrating Charlie Kirk's death.

Critics say conservatives are now being hypocritical because you oppose cancel culture. But is this the same as rose an losing her job over a crude joke. Or is it celebrating murder, and that's something more serious?

For many, this isn't about cancellation it's about trust. If a teacher is entrusted with children or a doctor entrusted with patients, publicly celebrates political violence, have they not yet disqualified themselves from those roles? Words matter. But cheering a death is an action. Is there any consequence for this? Yes. There is.

So let's have that conversation here for a second.

Is every -- is every speech controversy the same?

The answer to that is clearly no.

I mean, we've seen teachers and pastors and doctors and ordinary citizens lose their job now, just for saying they don't believe children under 18 should undergo transgender surgeries. Okay? Lost their job. Chased out.

That opinion, whether you agree or disagree is a moral and medical judgment.

And it is a matter of policy debate. It is speech in the public square.

I have a right to say, you're mutilating children. Okay. You have a right to say, no. We're not. This is the best practices. And then we can get into the silences of it. And we don't shout down the other side.

Okay? Now, on the other hand, you have Charlie Kirk's assassination. And we've seen teachers and professors go online and be celebrate.

Not criticize. Not argue policy. But celebrate that someone was murdered.

Some have gone so far and said, it's not a tragedy. It's a victory. Somebody else, another professor said, you reap what you sow.

Well, let me ask you: Are these two categories of free speech the same?

No! They're not.

Here's the difference. To say, I believe children should not be allowed to have gender surgeries, before 18. That is an attempt, right or wrong. It doesn't matter which side you are.

That is an attempt to protect life. Protect children. And guide society.

It's entering the debate about the role of medicine. The right of parents. And the boundaries of childhood. That's what that is about. To say Charlie Kirk's assassination is a good thing, that's not a debate. That's not even an idea. That's rejoicing in violence. It's glorifying death.

There's no place in a civil society for that kind of stuff. There's not. And it's a difference that actually matters.

You know, our Founders fought for free speech because they believed as Jefferson said, that air can be tolerated where truth is left free to combat it.

So I have no problem with people disagreeing with me, at all. I don't think you do either. I hope you don't. Otherwise, you should go back to read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Error can be tolerated where truth is left to be free to combat it.

But when speech shifts from debating ideas to celebrating death, doesn't that cease to be the pursuit of truth and instead, just become a glorification of evil?

I know where I stand on that one. Where do you stand?

I mean, if you go back and you look at history, in colonial matter -- in colonial America, if you were to go against the parliament and against the king, those words were dangerous. They were called treason. But they were whys. They were arguments about liberty and taxation and the rights of man.

And the Founders risked their lives against the dictator to say those things.

Now, compare that to France in 1793.

You Thomas Paine, one of or -- one of our founder kind of. On the edges of our founders.

He thought that what was happening in France is exactly like the American Revolution.

Washington -- no. It wasn't.

There the crowds. They didn't gather to argue. Okay? They argued to cheer the guillotine they didn't want the battle of ideas.

They wanted blood. They wanted heads to roll.

And roll they did. You know, until the people who were screaming for the heads to roll, shouted for blood, found that their own heads were rolling.

Then they turned around on that one pretty quickly.

Think of Rome.

Cicero begged his countrymen to preserve the republic through reason, law, and debate. Then what happened?

The mob started cheering assassinations.

They rejoiced that enemies were slaughtered.

They were being fed to the lions.

And the republic fell into empire.

And liberty was lost!

Okay. So now let me bring this back to Charlie Kirk here for a second.

If there's a professor that says, I don't believe children should have surgeries before adulthood, is that cancel culture, when they're fired?

Yes! Yes, it is.

Because that is speech this pursuit of truth.

However imperfect, it is speech meant to protect children, not to harm them. You also cannot be fired for saying, I disagree with that.

If you are telling, I disagree with that. And I will do anything to shut you down including assassination! Well, then, that's a different story.

What I teacher says, I'm glad Charlie Kirk is dead, is that cancel culture, if they're fired?

Or is that just society saying, you know, I don't think I can trust my kid to -- to that guy.

Or that woman.

I know, that's not an enlightening mind.

Somebody who delights in political murder.

I don't want them around my children! Scripture weighs in here too.

Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh. Matthew.

What does it reveal about the heart of a teacher who celebrates assassination?

To me, you go back to Scripture. Whoa unto them that call good evil -- evil good and good evil.

A society that will shrug on speech like this, say society that has lost its moral compass.

And I believe we still have a moral compass.

Now, our free speech law doesn't protect both. Absolutely. Under law. Absolutely.

Neither one of them should go to jail.

Neither should be silenced by the state.

But does trust survive both?

Can a parent trust their child to a teacher who is celebrating death?

I think no. I don't think a teacher can be trusted if they think that the children that it's right for children to see strippers in first grade!

I'm sorry. It's beyond reason. You should not be around my children!

But you shouldn't go to jail for that. Don't we, as a society have a right to demand virtue, in positions of authority?

Yes.

But the political class and honestly, the educational class, does everything they can to say, that doesn't matter.

But it does. And we're seeing it now. The line between cancel and culture, the -- the cancellation of people, and the accountability of people in our culture, it's not easy.

Except here. I think it is easy.

Cancel culture is about challenging the orthodoxy. Opinions about faith, morality, biology.
Accountability comes when speech reveals somebody's heart.

Accountability comes when you're like, you are a monster! You are celebrating violence. You're mocking life itself. One is an argument. The other is an abandonment of humanity. The Constitution, so you understand, protects both.

But we as a culture can decide, what kind of voices would shape our children? Heal our sick. Lead our communities?

I'm sorry, if you're in a position of trust, I think it's absolutely right for the culture to say, no!

No. You should not -- because this is not policy debate. This is celebrating death.

You know, our Founders gave us liberty.

And, you know, the big thing was, can you keep it?

Well, how do you keep it? Virtue. Virtue.

Liberty without virtue is suicide!

So if anybody is making this case to you, that this is cancel culture. I just want you to ask them this question.

Which do you want to defend?

Cancel culture that silences debate. Or a culture that still knows the difference between debating ideas and celebrating death.

Which one?

Could passengers have SAVED Iryna Zarutska?

Surveillance footage of the murder of Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska in Charlotte, NC, reveals that the other passengers on the train took a long time to help her. Glenn, Stu, and Jason debate whether they were right or wrong to do so.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You know, I'm -- I'm torn on how I feel about the people on the train.

Because my first instinct is, they did nothing! They did nothing! Then my -- well, sit down and, you know -- you know, you're going to be judged. So be careful on judging others.

What would I have done? What would I want my wife to do in that situation?

STU: Yeah. Are those two different questions, by the way.

GLENN: Yeah, they are.

STU: I think they go far apart from each other. What would I want myself to do. I mean, it's tough to put yourself in a situation. It's very easy to watch a video on the internet and talk about your heroism. Everybody can do that very easily on Twitter. And everybody is.

You know, when you're in a vehicle that doesn't have an exit with a guy who just murdered somebody in front of you, and has a dripping blood off of a knife that's standing 10 feet away from you, 15 feet away from you.

There's probably a different standard there, that we should all kind of consider. And maybe give a little grace to what I saw at least was a woman, sitting across the -- the -- the aisle.

I think there is a difference there. But when you talk about that question. Those two questions are definitive.

You know, I know what I would want myself to do. I would hope I would act in a way that didn't completely embarrass myself afterward.

But I also think, when I'm thinking of my wife. My advice to my wife would not be to jump into the middle of that situation at all costs. She might do that anyway. She actually is a heck of a lot stronger than I am.

But she might do it anyway.

GLENN: How pathetic, but how true.

STU: Yes. But that would not be my advice to her.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: Now, maybe once the guy has certainly -- is out of the area. And you don't think the moment you step into that situation. He will turn around and kill you too. Then, of course, obviously. Anything you can do to step in.

Not that there was much anyone on the train could do.

I mean, I don't think there was an outcome change, no matter what anyone on that train did.

Unfortunately.

But would I want her to step in?

Of course. If she felt she was safe, yes.

Think about, you said, your wife. Think about your daughter. Your daughter is on that train, just watching someone else getting murdered like that. Would you advise your daughter to jump into a situation like that?

That girl sitting across the aisle was somebody's daughter. I don't know, man.

JASON: I would. You know, as a dad, would I advise.

Hmm. No.

As a human being, would I hope that my daughter or my wife or that I would get up and at least comfort that woman while she's dying on the floor of a train?

Yeah.

I would hope that my daughter, my son, that I would -- and, you know, I have more confidence in my son or daughter or my wife doing something courageous more than I would.

But, you know, I think I have a more realistic picture of myself than anybody else.

And I'm not sure that -- I'm not sure what I would do in that situation. I know what I would hope I would do. But I also know what I fear I would do. But I would have hoped that I would have gotten up and at least tried to help her. You know, help her up off the floor. At least be there with her, as she's seeing her life, you know, spill out in under a minute.

And that's it other thing we have to keep in mind. This all happened so rapidly.

A minute is -- will seem like a very long period of time in that situation. But it's a very short period of time in real life.

STU: Yeah. You watch the video, Glenn. You know, I don't need the video to -- to change my -- my position on this.

But at his seem like there was a -- someone who did get there, eventually, to help, right? I saw someone seemingly trying to put pressure on her neck.

GLENN: Yeah. And tried to give her CPR.

STU: You know, no hope at that point. How long of a time period would you say that was?

Do you know off the top of your head?

GLENN: I don't know. I don't know. I know that we watched the video that I saw. I haven't seen past 30 seconds after she --

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: -- is down. And, you know, for 30 seconds nothing is happening. You know, that is -- that is not a very long period of time.

STU: Right.

GLENN: In reality.

STU: And especially, I saw the pace he was walking. He certainly can't be -- you know, he may have left the actual train car by 30 seconds to a minute. But he wasn't that far away. Like he was still in visual.

He could still turn around and look and see what's going on at that point. So certainly still a threat is my point. He has not, like, left the area. This is not that type of situation.

You know, I -- look, as you point out, I think if I could be super duper sexist for a moment here, sort of my dividing line might just be men and women.

You know, I don't know if it's that a -- you're not supposed to say that, I suppose these days. But, like, there is a difference there. If I'm a man, you know, I would be -- I would want my son to jump in on that, I suppose. I don't know if he could do anything about it. But you would expect at least a grown man to be able to go in there and do something about it. A woman, you know, I don't know.

Maybe I'm -- I hope --

GLENN: Here's the thing I -- here's the thing that I -- that causes me to say, no. You should have jumped in.

And that is, you know, you've already killed one person on the train. So you've proven that you're a killer. And anybody who would have screamed and got up and was with her, she's dying. She's dying. Get him. Get him.

Then the whole train is responsible for stopping that guy. You know. And if you don't stop him, after he's killed one person, if you're not all as members of that train, if you're not stopping him, you know, the person at the side of that girl would be the least likely to be killed. It would be the ones that are standing you up and trying to stop him from getting back to your daughter or your wife or you.

JASON: There was a -- speaking of men and women and their roles in this. There was a video circling social media yesterday. In Sweden. There was a group of officials up on a stage. And one of the main. I think it was health official woman collapses on stage. Completely passes out.

All the men kind of look away. Or I don't know if they're looking away. Or pretending that they didn't know what was going on. There was another woman standing directly behind the woman passed out.

Immediately springs into action. Jumps on top. Grabs her pant leg. Grabs her shoulder. Spins her over and starts providing care.

What did she have that the other guys did not? Or women?

She was a sheepdog. There is a -- this is my issue. And I completely agree with Stu. I completely agree with you. There's some people that do not respond this way. My issue is the proportion of sheepdogs versus people that don't really know how to act. That is diminishing in western society. And American society.

We see it all the time in these critical actions. I mean, circumstances.

There are men and women, and it's actually a meme. That fantasize about hoards of people coming to attack their home and family. And they sit there and say, I've got it. You guys go. I'm staying behind, while I smoke my cigarette and wait for the hoards to come, because I will sacrifice myself. There are men and women that fantasize of block my highway. Go ahead. Block my highway. I'm going to do something about it. They fantasize about someone holding up -- not a liquor store. A convenience store or something. Because they will step in and do something. My issue now is that proportion of sheepdogs in society is disappearing. Just on statistical fact, there should be one within that train car, and there were none.

STU: Yeah. I mean --

JASON: They did not respond.

STU: We see what happens when they do, with Daniel Penny. Our society tries to vilify them and crush their existence. Now, there weren't that many people on that train. Right?

At least on that car. At least it's limited. I only saw three or four people there, there may have been more. I agree with you, though. Like, you see what happens when we actually do have a really recent example of someone doing exactly what Jason wants and what I would want a guy to do. Especially a marine to step up and stop this from happening. And the man was dragged by our legal system to a position where he nearly had to spend the rest of his life in prison.

I mean, I -- it's insanity. Thankfully, they came to their senses on that one.

GLENN: Well, the difference between that one and this one though is that the guy was threatening. This one, he killed somebody.

STU: Yeah. Right. Well, but -- I think -- but it's the opposite way. The debate with Penny, was should he have recognize that had this person might have just been crazy and not done anything?

Maybe. He hadn't actually acted yet. He was just saying things.

GLENN: Yeah. Well --

STU: He didn't wind up stabbing someone. This is a situation where these people have already seen what this man will do to you, even when you don't do anything to try to stop him. So if this woman, who is, again, looks to be an average American woman.

Across the aisle. Steps in and tries to do something. This guy could easily turn around and just make another pile of dead bodies next to the one that already exists.

And, you know, whether that is an optimal solution for our society, I don't know that that's helpful.

In that situation.