WATCH: Kermit Gosnell's House of Horrors

Full Transcript:

I have to tell you, this is the most disturbing show that I think I’ve ever done.  This is some of the most disturbing information that I have seen and some of the most disturbing pictures I have ever seen, and I, you know, the last five years have studied the Holocaust and Auschwitz, so I’m not shocked by an awful lot anymore, unfortunately.  But I am shocked by what I’m going to show you tonight.

The old saying in TV news is “if it bleeds, it leads,” right?  But in a trial of abortion Dr. Kermit Gosnell, the media has shown sudden, incredible restraint at best, despite this, a 261-page report from a grand jury that is so shocking, horrifying, tragic, gut wrenching, tells you an awful lot about who we’re dealing with, not just with the doctor, but also society.  It is filled with details that make Hannibal Lecter look like Mother Teresa, and the media is just not interested.

I mean, they couldn’t get enough of Sandra Fluke’s plea for government-funded condoms.  They went full-throttle after the Susan G. Komen Foundation said they’re not going to give money for the abortion clinics of Planned Parenthood.  Tonight’s episode is going to make you just so proud to support Susan G. Komen.

Somehow, the news media just couldn’t see their way to news, any worthiness of a story about this man, Kermit Gosnell, and his murder clinic.  It was described with a TV-friendly headline “house of horrors.”  That’s what they call it in the grand jury report.  For over 20 years, Dr. Gosnell ran a multimillion-dollar abortion mill.  He got rich off routinely snipping the necks of the babies.  Don’t put this up yet, please.

I am going to show you beginning here some horrifying pictures.  This is your last warning to get the kids out of the room, stop, watch it later, or turn this off, but I think it is important, especially if you’re on the fence about whether it’s a baby or not.  Go ahead and show this.  Snipping the necks of babies…this is the back of a neck of one of the babies, and I’ll tell you which baby this was here in just a minute.  But this is the back of a baby’s head.

This was Gosnell’s term for jamming scissors, snipping, scissors into the back of the neck and cutting their spinal cord.  He also severed the babies’ feet, and he kept the feet in jars in the office.  Witnesses testified that the babies were moving, they were breathing, they were screeching.  Another witness testified they personally saw the doctor snip the necks of more than 30 babies.  Yet another said she had to kill the baby that was delivered in a toilet by cutting its neck with scissors.

He literally was able to convince people, and it doesn’t seem apparently that it was that hard to convince people in Philadelphia that worked for him that it was okay to kill a living, breathing, moving baby because, “It’s the baby’s reflexes.”  That’s all.  “It’s not really moving.”  Don’t worry about it.  As if killing the baby moments before in the womb was somehow or another better, so I guess you’ve already made your line.

We are talking about the cold-blooded murder of innocent babies.  Many were 20, or 25, or even 30 weeks along in the pregnancy.  I have to tell you, I see some of these pictures, and I see my children.  Now, that’s well past the 24-week limit.  One 30-week-old baby he aborted was nothing more than a punch line to him.  He joked that the baby was so big he could’ve walked her to the bus stop – that baby.

That baby was breathing and moving when born.  And he said, boy, your baby is so big, he could walk me to the bus stop, and he snipped the neck.  He took this baby and then just matter-of-factly threw him in a shoebox with the arms and legs lifelessly hanging over the edges.  This is Baby Boy B.  They found his body frozen in a one-gallon spring water bottle.  He was at least 28 weeks when he was killed.

“Baby C was moving and breathing for 20 minutes before an assistant came in and cut the spinal cord.”  She did it just the way she had seen the good doctor do it so many times.  And then the report goes on to the Sunday babies, the Sunday babies, “’the really big ones,’ that even he was afraid to perform in front of others.”  By the way, did I tell you that this is a black doctor, and he wasn’t doing this to white women because he said that white women would most likely complain and so he’d get in trouble.  So he was just keeping it to African-American and minority women.  This was Margaret Sanger’s dream come true, Progressives.

He said the really big ones he was afraid to perform in front of others.  These abortions were scheduled for Sundays – oh, he stayed with the Lord’s day – a day when the clinic was closed and none of the regular employees were present.  The only person allowed to assist with these special cases was his wife.  The files for these patients were not kept at the office.  Gosnell took them home with him and disposed of them.  We may never know the details of these cases.  We do know, however, that during the rest of the week, Gosnell routinely aborted and killed babies in the sixth and seventh month of pregnancy.  The Sunday babies were bigger still.

They described the facility as – as quite interesting, “scattered throughout, in cabinets, in the basement, in a freezer, in jars and bags and plastic jugs, were fetal remains.  It was a baby charnel house.”  He slaughtered hundreds, possibly thousands of children.  This is the biggest, bloodiest, mass murderer in the history of our country.  This guy is far, far worse than anything, anything that Jeffrey Dahmer did, far worse, any of the mass murderers, serial killers.

The media doesn’t cover it.  Well, they didn’t cover it until they were shamed into it.  The media would be more interested, I guess, if he would’ve used an AR-15 to ensure fetal demise as he called it.  About the only media attention was this story reporting on how little attention the story was actually receiving.  A columnist from Bucks County, PA, J.D. Mullane, one of the few actually covering the event.  He snapped, this is the most damning photo for the press at a recent courtroom hearing.

Those seats are reserved for the various members of the press, three rows of seats to accommodate 40 reporters.  Mullane was the only reporter to attend, along with one from the New York Times who showed up later in the day and stayed for maybe five minutes.  The trial began nearly a month ago on March 18, but NBC, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, no, they didn’t cover that at all.  They covered it last week.  The question is why?

Well, I want you to know I don’t think it’s some conspiracy theory to avoid the story or anything like that.  I think it’s a lack of intuitive interest from the press that betrays their beliefs.  You see, abortion is not wrong to the people in the press, it’s not wrong.  I mean, it’s not really a big deal.  The White House press conference today, Jay Carney was asked about Gosnell, and here’s what he said.  I want you to listen to this carefully.

Jay Carney:  I’ll say two things. One, the president is aware of this. Two, the president does not and cannot take a position on an ongoing trial, so I won’t as well.

Oh my gosh, how about Trayvon?  Let me ask you this – boy would I like to use some names.  This president during the health care debate accused doctors of cutting the feet off of patients for an extra 30 grand.  Do you remember that?  And I said where is the evidence?  Give me one case, where’s the evidence?  Nothing, and the press went on and reported those lies over and over again.  And yet he has nothing to say about this doctor who literally has feet in jars, and the president can’t speak out about it.

Oh, he does care about healthcare so much, doesn’t he?  He cares about the American people and making sure that we don’t have another Mengele.  You see, the left isn’t outraged that 25 week-year-old babies are terminated or 25-week babies are terminated, because it’s completely legal the week before.  So if you’re totally cool with an unborn baby being terminated as you would call it at 24 weeks, why are you appalled when they’re terminated seven days later?

Perhaps the scariest part of this entire story, the thing that concerns me the most, is what Gosnell convinced others to do.  He convinced people, apparently it wasn’t too hard either, to look at a living, crying, moving baby and slit its neck and murder it.  “Over the years, there were hundreds of ‘snippings.’  Sometimes if Gosnell was unavailable, the ‘snipping’ was done by one of his fake doctors, or even by one of the administrative staff…”  Really, you go from licking stamps to killing babies? 

“Everyone there acted as if it wasn’t murder at all.”  Well, of course they didn’t think it was murder.  Of course they didn’t think it was murder.  They’re a week late.  What have they been indoctrinated with for so long?  That’s not a life in the womb; that’s a woman’s choice.  She can do whatever she wants with it.  We’ve just heard over and over and over again how it’s just nothing but tissue in there.  It’s just a collection of cells.  MSNBC calls that a thing.

Well, if you can convince someone to murder an infant in cold blood, of course this is a thing.  Look at the picture.  That ain’t a thing, man.  If you can convince somebody that you can go in and kill that child, a woman can kill that child, and then just, I guess, brush it off and call for the next patient, if you can do that, what can’t you convince them to do?

Let me tell you something, this is a result of a culture that does not value life at all.  For over two decades, hear me, 20 years, Kermit Gosnell convinced people to slit the necks of perfectly healthy babies, several per day, week after week after week, year after year, baby after baby after baby.

Let’s just take this as – the testimony says an average of 15 a day.  Let’s just look for the first decade.  Fifteen a day, that means this man killed more children in a single month than all of the school shootings in the history of America combined, and no one in the media says anything.  But that’s only because they care so much about children.  We have to do something for the collective, you know?

I lived in Philadelphia.  I live in Texas for a reason, but believe me, we’re headed for troubled times.  When a society does not react to these kinds of things, there’s trouble.  When I tell you there will be stories coming out like this over the elderly or the handicapped, go ahead, mock me – the mentally ill, anybody whose quality of life a Progressive deems inadequate or if there’s an emergency, of course.

We’re already talking about – Krugman admitted the death panels, and nobody in the media said a word, and they’re already doing this in the UK.  Now, of course, they’re putting their elderly, 130,000 a year are put on the pathway to death, the death pathway.  Well, it’s being done for a very good reason, of course, out of compassion.  Well, hello, Dr. Mengele. 

Today is the anniversary of the birth and death of Corrie ten Boom.  Please, please read about Corrie ten Boom.  Please, reevaluate, because we need to stand.  The media is naturally recoiling from this story because it shines a bright light on exactly what it means to be pro-choice.  Sure, most abortion doctors aren’t as flippant about it.  They kill the baby in the womb so you don’t, you know, you don’t see the baby moving around and crying.  It doesn’t cause any trauma.  But whether this is in the house of horrors or in the best hospital in America, the end result is the same, a real child dies.  A life ends.  That’s it, period.

You can call it whatever you want, but that’s the truth, and the truth shall set you free.  Now that people are catching on, the media is scrambling to cover its tracks.  How about the hospitals, are they covering their tracks?  Because hospitals were involved in this.  This one I love.  This one is from NBC news:  “The story is on our radar.”  Really?  How about this from CBS:  “CBS has been working the story...”  Oh, I bet you have.

CBS Evening News – Sunday, first time they reported on it.  Washington Post got pissy.  They admitted that he wasn’t aware of the story.  Watch this one, wasn’t aware of the story until the readers began e-mailing about it.  “I wish I could be conscious of all stories everywhere, but I can’t be, nor can any of us,” says Martin Baron, Washington Post Executive Director.  Oh well, thank you.  You sound humble.

Even Headline News, a network that I believe is 80% Nancy Grace and the other court-related shows, they’re not even bothering to cover this case.  Well, this is a fascinating case.  In the interest of being fair and straight up with you, we didn’t cover it, either, at least not right away.  I don’t have affiliate stations in every market in the country.  I don’t have a massive staff.  It’s our job to get it right.

It’s our job, so I won’t use that staff or anything else as an excuse.  That is why when the trial started on March 18, TheBlaze didn’t have any coverage of it until March 19, the day after the trial began.  Where were the reporters that I know for a fact read TheBlaze every single day?  Where were they?

At the risk of sounding crass, help us grow.  We will not miss the story of the biggest serial killer in American history, and for another thing, people don’t progress.  They might as individuals over their lifetime, but we all start at the beginning with good or evil, and it is up to each of us as individuals to decide, not the collective.  The collective doesn’t decide.  We don’t progress as a collective; we do as individuals.

Tell me, tell me this isn’t the American Mengele, and no other network would dare say that, no other network.  Every other network would chastise me for saying it on the air.  Amen, brother, this guy’s a monster.  And nobody will say it because whether it’s left or right, you are not getting the truth.  You’re getting a political agenda, and that agenda too many times is the collective right over the individual right.

And you’ll notice when the media will tell this story, they will not show you the pictures I showed.  And maybe they’re making the right decision, but I don’t think so, because those pictures will make you say, Who the hell in the collective is standing up for the individual child?

A nation unravels when its shared culture is the first thing to go

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Texas now hosts Quran-first academies, Sharia-compliant housing schemes, and rapidly multiplying mosques — all part of a movement building a self-contained society apart from the country around it.

It is time to talk honestly about what is happening inside America’s rapidly growing Muslim communities. In city after city, large pockets of newcomers are choosing to build insulated enclaves rather than enter the broader American culture.

That trend is accelerating, and the longer we ignore it, the harder it becomes to address.

As Texas goes, so goes America. And as America goes, so goes the free world.

America has always welcomed people of every faith and people from every corner of the world, but the deal has never changed: You come here and you join the American family. You are free to honor your traditions, keep your faith, but you must embrace the Constitution as the supreme law of the land. You melt into the shared culture that allows all of us to live side by side.

Across the country, this bargain is being rejected by Islamist communities that insist on building a parallel society with its own rules, its own boundaries, and its own vision for how life should be lived.

Texas illustrates the trend. The state now has roughly 330 mosques. At least 48 of them were built in just the last 24 months. The Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex alone has around 200 Islamic centers. Houston has another hundred or so. Many of these communities have no interest in blending into American life.

This is not the same as past waves of immigration. Irish, Italian, Korean, Mexican, and every other group arrived with pride in their heritage. Still, they also raised American flags and wanted their children to be part of the country’s future. They became doctors, small-business owners, teachers, and soldiers. They wanted to be Americans.

What we are watching now is not the melting pot. It is isolation by design.

Parallel societies do not end well

More than 300 fundamentalist Islamic schools now operate full-time across the country. Many use Quran-first curricula that require students to spend hours memorizing religious texts before they ever reach math or science. In Dallas, Brighter Horizons Academy enrolls more than 1,700 students and draws federal support while operating on a social model that keeps children culturally isolated.

Then there is the Epic City project in Collin and Hunt counties — 402 acres originally designated only for Muslim buyers, with Sharia-compliant financing and a mega-mosque at the center. After public outcry and state investigations, the developers renamed it “The Meadows,” but a new sign does not erase the original intent. It is not a neighborhood. It is a parallel society.

Americans should not hesitate to say that parallel societies are dangerous. Europe tried this experiment, and the results could not be clearer. In Germany, France, and the United Kingdom, entire neighborhoods now operate under their own cultural rules, some openly hostile to Western norms. When citizens speak up, they are branded bigots for asserting a basic right: the ability to live safely in their own communities.

A crisis of confidence

While this separation widens, another crisis is unfolding at home. A recent Gallup survey shows that about 40% of American women ages 18 to 39 would leave the country permanently if given the chance. Nearly half of a rising generation — daughters, sisters, soon-to-be mothers — no longer believe this nation is worth building a future in.

And who shapes the worldview of young boys? Their mothers. If a mother no longer believes America is home, why would her child grow up ready to defend it?

As Texas goes, so goes America. And as America goes, so goes the free world. If we lose confidence in our own national identity at the same time that we allow separatist enclaves to spread unchecked, the outcome is predictable. Europe is already showing us what comes next: cultural fracture, political radicalization, and the slow death of national unity.

Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

Stand up and tell the truth

America welcomes Muslims. America defends their right to worship freely. A Muslim who loves the Constitution, respects the rule of law, and wants to raise a family in peace is more than welcome in America.

But an Islamist movement that rejects assimilation, builds enclaves governed by its own religious framework, and treats American law as optional is not simply another participant in our melting pot. It is a direct challenge to it. If we refuse to call this problem out out of fear of being called names, we will bear the consequences.

Europe is already feeling those consequences — rising conflict and a political class too paralyzed to admit the obvious. When people feel their culture, safety, and freedoms slipping away, they will follow anyone who promises to defend them. History has shown that over and over again.

Stand up. Speak plainly. Be unafraid. You can practice any faith in this country, but the supremacy of the Constitution and the Judeo-Christian moral framework that shaped it is non-negotiable. It is what guarantees your freedom in the first place.

If you come here and honor that foundation, welcome. If you come here to undermine it, you do not belong here.

Wake up to what is unfolding before the consequences arrive. Because when a nation refuses to say what is true, the truth eventually forces its way in — and by then, it is always too late.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Shocking: AI-written country song tops charts, sparks soul debate

VCG / Contributor | Getty Images

A machine can imitate heartbreak well enough to top the charts, but it cannot carry grief, choose courage, or hear the whisper that calls human beings to something higher.

The No. 1 country song in America right now was not written in Nashville or Texas or even L.A. It came from code. “Walk My Walk,” the AI-generated single by the AI artist Breaking Rust, hit the top spot on Billboard’s Country Digital Song Sales chart, and if you listen to it without knowing that fact, you would swear a real singer lived the pain he is describing.

Except there is no “he.” There is no lived experience. There is no soul behind the voice dominating the country music charts.

If a machine can imitate the soul, then what is the soul?

I will admit it: I enjoy some AI music. Some of it is very good. And that leaves us with a question that is no longer science fiction. If a machine can fake being human this well, what does it mean to be human?

A new world of artificial experience

This is not just about one song. We are walking straight into a technological moment that will reshape everyday life.

Elon Musk said recently that we may not even have phones in five years. Instead, we will carry a small device that listens, anticipates, and creates — a personal AI agent that knows what we want to hear before we ask. It will make the music, the news, the podcasts, the stories. We already live in digital bubbles. Soon, those bubbles might become our own private worlds.

If an algorithm can write a hit country song about hardship and perseverance without a shred of actual experience, then the deeper question becomes unavoidable: If a machine can imitate the soul, then what is the soul?

What machines can never do

A machine can produce, and soon it may produce better than we can. It can calculate faster than any human mind. It can rearrange the notes and words of a thousand human songs into something that sounds real enough to fool millions.

But it cannot care. It cannot love. It cannot choose right and wrong. It cannot forgive because it cannot be hurt. It cannot stand between a child and danger. It cannot walk through sorrow.

A machine can imitate the sound of suffering. It cannot suffer.

The difference is the soul. The divine spark. The thing God breathed into man that no code will ever have. Only humans can take pain and let it grow into compassion. Only humans can take fear and turn it into courage. Only humans can rebuild their lives after losing everything. Only humans hear the whisper inside, the divine voice that says, “Live for something greater.”

We are building artificial minds. We are not building artificial life.

Questions that define us

And as these artificial minds grow sharper, as their tools become more convincing, the right response is not panic. It is to ask the oldest and most important questions.

Who am I? Why am I here? What is the meaning of freedom? What is worth defending? What is worth sacrificing for?

That answer is not found in a lab or a server rack. It is found in that mysterious place inside each of us where reason meets faith, where suffering becomes wisdom, where God reminds us we are more than flesh and more than thought. We are not accidents. We are not circuits. We are not replaceable.

Europa Press News / Contributor | Getty Images

The miracle machines can never copy

Being human is not about what we can produce. Machines will outproduce us. That is not the question. Being human is about what we can choose. We can choose to love even when it costs us something. We can choose to sacrifice when it is not easy. We can choose to tell the truth when the world rewards lies. We can choose to stand when everyone else bows. We can create because something inside us will not rest until we do.

An AI content generator can borrow our melodies, echo our stories, and dress itself up like a human soul, but it cannot carry grief across a lifetime. It cannot forgive an enemy. It cannot experience wonder. It cannot look at a broken world and say, “I am going to build again.”

The age of machines is rising. And if we do not know who we are, we will shrink. But if we use this moment to remember what makes us human, it will help us to become better, because the one thing no algorithm will ever recreate is the miracle that we exist at all — the miracle of the human soul.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Shocking shift: America’s youth lured by the “Socialism trap”

Jeremy Weine / Stringer | Getty Images

A generation that’s lost faith in capitalism is turning to the oldest lie on earth: equality through control.

Something is breaking in America’s young people. You can feel it in every headline, every grocery bill, every young voice quietly asking if the American dream still means anything at all.

For many, the promise of America — work hard, build something that lasts, and give the next generation a better start — feels like it no longer exists. Home ownership and stability have become luxuries for a fortunate few.

Capitalism is not a perfect system. It is flawed because people are flawed, but it remains the only system that rewards creativity and effort rather than punishing them.

In that vacuum of hope, a new promise has begun to rise — one that sounds compassionate, equal, and fair. The promise of socialism.

The appeal of a broken dream

When the American dream becomes a checklist of things few can afford — a home, a car, two children, even a little peace — disappointment quickly turns to resentment. The average first-time homebuyer is now 40 years old. Debt lasts longer than marriages. The cost of living rises faster than opportunity.

For a generation that has never seen the system truly work, capitalism feels like a rigged game built to protect those already at the top.

That is where socialism finds its audience. It presents itself as fairness for the forgotten and justice for the disillusioned. It speaks softly at first, offering equality, compassion, and control disguised as care.

We are seeing that illusion play out now in New York City, where Zohran Mamdani — an open socialist — has won a major political victory. The same ideology that once hid behind euphemisms now campaigns openly throughout America’s once-great cities. And for many who feel left behind, it sounds like salvation.

But what socialism calls fairness is submission dressed as virtue. What it calls order is obedience. Once the system begins to replace personal responsibility with collective dependence, the erosion of liberty is only a matter of time.

The bridge that never ends

Socialism is not a destination; it is a bridge. Karl Marx described it as the necessary transition to communism — the scaffolding that builds the total state. Under socialism, people are taught to obey. Under communism, they forget that any other options exist.

History tells the story clearly. Russia, China, Cambodia, Cuba — each promised equality and delivered misery. One hundred million lives were lost, not because socialism failed, but because it succeeded at what it was designed to do: make the state supreme and the individual expendable.

Today’s advocates insist their version will be different — democratic, modern, and kind. They often cite Sweden as an example, but Sweden’s prosperity was never born of socialism. It grew out of capitalism, self-reliance, and a shared moral culture. Now that system is cracking under the weight of bureaucracy and division.

ANGELA WEISS / Contributor | Getty Images

The real issue is not economic but moral. Socialism begins with a lie about human nature — that people exist for the collective and that the collective knows better than the individual.

This lie is contrary to the truths on which America was founded — that rights come not from government’s authority, but from God’s. Once government replaces that authority, compassion becomes control, and freedom becomes permission.

What young America deserves

Young Americans have many reasons to be frustrated. They were told to study, work hard, and follow the rules — and many did, only to find the goalposts moved again and again. But tearing down the entire house does not make it fairer; it only leaves everyone standing in the rubble.

Capitalism is not a perfect system. It is flawed because people are flawed, but it remains the only system that rewards creativity and effort rather than punishing them. The answer is not revolution but renewal — moral, cultural, and spiritual.

It means restoring honesty to markets, integrity to government, and faith to the heart of our nation. A people who forsake God will always turn to government for salvation, and that road always ends in dependency and decay.

Freedom demands something of us. It requires faith, discipline, and courage. It expects citizens to govern themselves before others govern them. That is the truth this generation deserves to hear again — that liberty is not a gift from the state but a calling from God.

Socialism always begins with promises and ends with permission. It tells you what to drive, what to say, what to believe, all in the name of fairness. But real fairness is not everyone sharing the same chains — it is everyone having the same chance.

The American dream was never about guarantees. It was about the right to try, to fail, and try again. That freedom built the most prosperous nation in history, and it can do so again if we remember that liberty is not a handout but a duty.

Socialism does not offer salvation. It requires subservience.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Rage isn’t conservatism — THIS is what true patriots stand for

Gary Hershorn / Contributor | Getty Images

Conservatism is not about rage or nostalgia. It’s about moral clarity, national renewal, and guarding the principles that built America’s freedom.

Our movement is at a crossroads, and the question before us is simple: What does it mean to be a conservative in America today?

For years, we have been told what we are against — against the left, against wokeism, against decline. But opposition alone does not define a movement, and it certainly does not define a moral vision.

We are not here to cling to the past or wallow in grievance. We are not the movement of rage. We are the movement of reason and hope.

The media, as usual, are eager to supply their own answer. The New York Times recently suggested that Nick Fuentes represents the “future” of conservatism. That’s nonsense — a distortion of both truth and tradition. Fuentes and those like him do not represent American conservatism. They represent its counterfeit.

Real conservatism is not rage. It is reverence. It does not treat the past as a museum, but as a teacher. America’s founders asked us to preserve their principles and improve upon their practice. That means understanding what we are conserving — a living covenant, not a relic.

Conservatism as stewardship

In 2025, conservatism means stewardship — of a nation, a culture, and a moral inheritance too precious to abandon. To conserve is not to freeze history. It is to stand guard over what is essential. We are custodians of an experiment in liberty that rests on the belief that rights come not from kings or Congress, but from the Creator.

That belief built this country. It will be what saves it. The Constitution is a covenant between generations. Conservatism is the duty to keep that covenant alive — to preserve what works, correct what fails, and pass on both wisdom and freedom to those who come next.

Economics, culture, and morality are inseparable. Debt is not only fiscal; it is moral. Spending what belongs to the unborn is theft. Dependence is not compassion; it is weakness parading as virtue. A society that trades responsibility for comfort teaches citizens how to live as slaves.

Freedom without virtue is not freedom; it is chaos. A culture that mocks faith cannot defend liberty, and a nation that rejects truth cannot sustain justice. Conservatism must again become the moral compass of a disoriented people, reminding America that liberty survives only when anchored to virtue.

Rebuilding what is broken

We cannot define ourselves by what we oppose. We must build families, communities, and institutions that endure. Government is broken because education is broken, and education is broken because we abandoned the formation of the mind and the soul. The work ahead is competence, not cynicism.

Conservatives should embrace innovation and technology while rejecting the chaos of Silicon Valley. Progress must not come at the expense of principle. Technology must strengthen people, not replace them. Artificial intelligence should remain a servant, never a master. The true strength of a nation is not measured by data or bureaucracy, but by the quiet webs of family, faith, and service that hold communities together. When Washington falters — and it will — those neighborhoods must stand.

Eric Lee / Stringer | Getty Images

This is the real work of conservatism: to conserve what is good and true and to reform what has decayed. It is not about slogans; it is about stewardship — the patient labor of building a civilization that remembers what it stands for.

A creed for the rising generation

We are not here to cling to the past or wallow in grievance. We are not the movement of rage. We are the movement of reason and hope.

For the rising generation, conservatism cannot be nostalgia. It must be more than a memory of 9/11 or admiration for a Reagan era they never lived through. Many young Americans did not experience those moments — and they should not have to in order to grasp the lessons they taught and the truths they embodied. The next chapter is not about preserving relics but renewing purpose. It must speak to conviction, not cynicism; to moral clarity, not despair.

Young people are searching for meaning in a culture that mocks truth and empties life of purpose. Conservatism should be the moral compass that reminds them freedom is responsibility and that faith, family, and moral courage remain the surest rebellions against hopelessness.

To be a conservative in 2025 is to defend the enduring principles of American liberty while stewarding the culture, the economy, and the spirit of a free people. It is to stand for truth when truth is unfashionable and to guard moral order when the world celebrates chaos.

We are not merely holding the torch. We are relighting it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.