Hard stand?! Donald Trump has the same immigration policy as Lindsey Graham

July 06, 2015

WRITER

A lot of listeners to the radio show have called in and say they stand with Donald Trump because he says the things other candidates are too scared to say. But when it comes to actual policy on issues like illegal immigration, does he really take a hard stand? Pat and Stu looked past the harsh (and inartful) rhetoric on radio today, and did a deeper analysis on what Trump’s actual policy on immigration reform. SPOILER: It looks a lot like amnesty.

Listen to the segment below:

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it may contain errors:

PAT: Hopefully your Fourth of July weekend was a great one. Not so great, I guess, for Donald Trump who continues to get -- I guess he's being bludgeoned, is how I would describe it by everybody, except Ted Cruz. Which is kind of weird.

STU: That's not exactly my favorite moment of the Ted Cruz campaign.

PAT: Mine either. Mine either.

STU: We can go into that in a minute. He didn't say he supported the comments. But he said, I love Donald Trump. I think he's great. You know, we all get worked up about all this, and I like Donald Trump. There's reasons not to like Donald Trump, I would say.

PAT: Yeah. And even if you like him, reasons not to say you do.

STU: Well, that's --

PAT: Do you have to volunteer that information?

JEFFY: Ted's not going to do that.

PAT: I know he's not. But I don't think that's helpful to his campaign.

STU: You know the comments that we're talking about with Donald Trump, where he talked about, you know, the way it's being summarized in the press, to some level unfairly is he called all Mexicans rapists.

PAT: That's really not what he said.

STU: He didn't really say that, but he didn't exactly not say it either. We'll listen to the audio here in a second.

PAT: So you're saying he didn't say it, but he didn't not say it.

STU: Yes, I will say that's a fair way. Because he doesn't do the typical thing that you would do. If you're going to say, look, there are a lot of great people in Mexico. Not everyone who comes across the border are terrorists and rapists or whatever, but there are some. And you know what, we live in a country where we don't need to import crime.

PAT: That would have been a great way to put it. But that's not Donald Trump.

STU: The vast majority of this audience I would say agrees with that statement. But that's not what he said. What he said was the exact opposite, which was: I think there might be a possibility that someone isn't a rapist.

PAT: Now, it's not what he said because that's not how Donald Trump speaks. He's bombastic, and he's --

STU: Let's put it clearly. Dumb. It's a dumb way to put it.

PAT: It is.

STU: And he's now taken the -- as we talked about it, all the oxygen out of this campaign. Every single candidate that is out there, and there are many good ones, are doing nothing, but answering for the dumb things that Donald Trump says.

PAT: Yeah. As we've mentioned many times, there are more great candidates in this race at the same time than have there ever been in my lifetime, I think, in my opinion. And I think includes the Reagan years. That goes back, well, beyond 1960, because that's when I was born.

STU: Reagan, you had one great candidate. And he was a great candidate no doubt about it. And he was a great president. But you didn't this have depth. Where you have legitimately somewhere between six and ten really solid candidates out there. Ones you could see yourself maybe actually supporting and thinking he's going to live up to his principles for once.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: I mean, you would probably be wrong. Because once they're in office, they'll screw us as they always do. But at least there's the hope.

PAT: It's amazing how many times that's happened to people we've actually spoken with and warned them about that. And they've promised, oh, that's not going to happen to me. I'm immune to that. I got a force field around me of righteousness, and it can't be penetrated. And then two weeks later, they're on the other side. It's like, what happened?

STU: It's amazing.

PAT: It's incredible.

STU: It's a powerful place. I believe, was it Spider-Man -- I think it was talking about how, with great power comes great responsibility.

PAT: Yes.

STU: Certainly you have the absolute power corrupts absolutely. Clichés become clichés for a reason. And those seem to apply very well. The thing with Donald Trump though -- what amazes me about this conversation is the people that support Donald Trump. The people that say, okay, look, he's being beat up by the press. I'm sick of this PC nonsense. He came out, and he's telling the truth. We've heard this from many members of our audience. Though I will say Trump has not performed well in the polls, as far as the monthly poll we do of the audience. But there are passionate supporters of Donald Trump. And the argument seems to be, he's willing to say the things that are unpopular. He's willing to take the hard stand.

PAT: Is he? Is he willing to take a hard stand?

STU: Right. But the question is, hard stand for what? Yes, we all admire someone who will take a tough stand on an issue that is important to them like immigration. But what policy stands behind the tough words of Donald Trump?

PAT: Well, we have a montage to show what Stu is talking about here. And if you listen closely, you'll hear the policy he supports within this montage of saying really hard things against illegals. Saying really I guess outrageous things because the left will crucify you for saying these things. He's saying it. But then listen to his stance here, if you can pick that out.

DONALD: They're sending people with lots of problems. And they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.

STU: Some, I assume, are -- it's a throwaway to him, that there could be possibly someone who is a good person/non-rapist.

PAT: I mean, he doubts it. I think. I doubt it. I doubt it. People tell me there are some good people among them. I don't know if that's true. But let's just say it is for the sake of argument.

STU: Right. It's a throwaway. It's in reverse of where it would normally be.

PAT: Mostly though, they're rapists. I mean, it is kind of -- it's a bad statement.

STU: I will say this, if there were 11 million rapists in the country from Mexico, that is the only thing that could possibly justify the statistics that Obama talk about with college rape. Because maybe if there were 11 --

PAT: And they all went to college.

STU: Were all constantly raping. Neither one of those statistics are true, by the way.

PAT: And there's more.

DONALD: I love Mexico. I love the Mexican people.

STU: That's great.

DONALD: Two waiters came up to me tonight, Mr. Trump, we love you. I said, that's great. I love you too.

PAT: Yeah, that happens all the time.

STU: Two waiters.

PAT: Two waiters come up to me and they say, Mr. Trump, we love you.

Where you from?

Mexico.

Well, I love you too. What a brilliant story that is.

STU: Oh, my God. The way he tells it.

PAT: I'm sure, completely true. The way he tells it, it's so compelling. You can feel the love he has for all Mexicans.

STU: Again, that's not policy. That's just, again, him talking about his love of Mexican waiters.

PAT: Yes.

DONALD: These countries aren't sending their finest. They're sending people that are -- like, got a lot of problems.

STU: Okay. Stop. Is that true?

PAT: First of all, they're not really sending them.

STU: Right. The people are coming on their own volition.

PAT: People are coming on their own. But the people coming on their own obviously aren't doing really well in Mexico. Right?

Otherwise, they would stay there. That much is pretty true. Because if you're doing well, you're supporting your family, you love your life, you're not leaving it and sneaking across the US border to get here illegally. That's obvious.

STU: Yeah, I mean -- he goes into this a little bit as this montage goes on. I think you pointed out, Pat. They're not sending Carlos Slim.

PAT: Carlos Slim is not swimming across the Rio Grande to get here.

STU: No. But when you do have a situation where you see high rewards with little risk by crossing the border -- remember, we complain about this. So he we know it's true. That we treat this as a speeding ticket. So Mexicans look at this and say, yeah, is it illegal? Maybe, yeah. But they don't do anything about it. So I might as well go over there and make more money

PAT: Right.

STU: So it's not necessarily the same way it used to be, where it was this incredible risk to cross the border. You're leaving your family risking life and limb to make a little money.

PAT: There's almost no risk anymore.

STU: As we saw with the illegal immigrant who crossed the border and was deported five times before he killed an American citizen. We should get into that later, and Trump has been touting that as another example.

PAT: Horrible story.

STU: And of course there are examples. And he's right, there is crime that comes across the border all the time.

PAT: Sadly, the biggest risk is, to them, getting here in the first place. And we should probably talk about that more. Because they're often -- a lot of these rapists Trump is talking about are these coyotes that sneak them across the border and then do horrible things to the women that they've helped cross the border. We've talked about the rape trees before where they leave the panties in the trees and all that freaky stuff. It's been documented. So part of that is true. It's just he put it so badly. He's just not a good speaker. I don't know how anybody could think this guy has a shot at the presidency.

STU: Again, we're so far talking about how he speaks about this issue, which might be inartful. But we haven't got to any policy yet. So let's keep listening.

DONALD: That makes sense. I basically said this. We need to strengthen our borders, and they said I'm a racist.

STU: Sure, strengthening borders.

DONALD: To get the cars and trucks and everything over here, let the illegals drive them in. They're coming in anyway.

(laughter)

I do great with Latino voters. I employ so many Latinos. I have so many people working for me.

PAT: Some of my best servants are illegals.

STU: Two waiters, I employ them.

PAT: I employ them. Waiters. So he's very much talking down to and about --

STU: Maybe we're just too sensitive, Pat. You know, because these people who are really tough on the border are going to say, you know what, it's just too sensitive. Let's listen to some policy, shall we?

DONALD: Common sense. They don't want these people, so they send them to the United States. Because the United States is run by stupid people. Some are good and some are rapists and some are killers, and we don't even know what we're getting.

I'm not just saying Mexicans. I'm talking about people that are from all over that are killers and rapists.

I've taken a lot of heat. And it's very unnecessary -- very unfair heat. Because, first of all, I love the Mexican people. How can I not love people that gives me tens of millions of dollars for apartments? You have to love them.

(laughter)

STU: How can you not love people who give you tens of millions of dollars --

PAT: For apartments.

STU: For apartments. Again, inartful.

PAT: Really bad.

STU: I'm going to say yes on that one.

PAT: Are you really? You're going out on that limb.

STU: On that limb. So waiters. My employees. And people I sell apartments too.

PAT: Crazy.

DONALD: I love them for their spirit. And then I talk about Mexico. And I love Mexico. But every time I talk about it, they accuse me of being a racist. You have illegals that are just pouring across the borders. I was really criticized for the border. But the truth is, it's true. They think it's Mother Teresas coming across the border. Well, I said drug dealers, I said killers, and I said rapists. And they made the word rapist -- they really picked that up.

I tell you, I love the folks from South America. They're friends of mine. Many work for me. Many are friends. Many buy apartments from me.

I have great love for the Mexican people. And I always have. And they like me. No apology because everything I said is 100 percent correct. You have 20 million, 30 million, nobody knows what it is. It used to be 11 million. Now today, I hear it's 11. But I don't think it's 11. I actually heard you probably have 30 million. You have to give them a pass, and you have to make it possible for them to succeed.

PAT: Wait. What? Hold on.

STU: Whoa.

PAT: Because there's 30 million illegals here. You have to give them a path. A path to what?

STU: The path to what. Because it's interesting, the people who support Trump seem to be the ones toughest on the border because they like the tough talk. Yet what they're getting is the tough talk with the Lindsey Graham policy, with the Jeb Bush policy.

PAT: It's so weird.

STU: He's saying he wants a pathway to citizenship.

PAT: It's amnesty.

STU: It's the thing that every one of the people that likes Trump -- call it amnesty. It's the same thing. And we have other clips to support this as well. Maybe we can do them on the other side. The issue here is what you're getting, all the problems with tough talk out of Donald Trump, and then you're not even getting the tough policy. You're getting the Jeb Bush/Lindsey Graham policy. Why would anyone want that combination of two things?

PAT: I don't know.

STU: Tough talk with crap policy? If you're going to get someone who will get in the news all the time for saying things that are controversial, at least they should have the best policy for what you believe in.

PAT: Yes.

STU: People are out there -- I can't believe Jeb Bush. He's criticizing Trump. They have the same idea as how to deal with this problem. Except Trump is saying things that get him into more trouble. Is that what you want?

PAT: And Trump is saying things that fire up those of us who want something done about the out-of-control illegal border crossing situation.

STU: Obviously it's out of control.

PAT: It needs to be fixed. We need to shore up the border. Now, there's not a single person alive who do not say that. Everybody says that, including Barack Obama. Says we have to shore up the border. He just doesn't do it. So everybody agrees we have to say at least that we'll shore up the border. So everybody says that. There's nothing there to this Donald Trump thing, except pissing people off.

STU: At the end of it, what did you get? You get a pathway to citizenship -- that's what John McCain was pushing. Now, you'll get that plus the tough talk. I don't understand the combination thing. We'll get into more here in just a second.

Featured Image: US presidential hopeful Donald Trump delivers remarks at the Maryland Republican Party's 25th Annual Red, White & Blue Dinner on June 23, 2015 at the BWI Airport Marriott in Linthicum, Maryland .PAUL J. RICHARDS/AFP/Getty Images

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.

Glenn Beck: Here's what's WRONG with conservatism today

Getty Images / Handout | Getty Images

What does it mean to be a conservative in 2025? Glenn offers guidance on what conservatives need to do to ensure the conservative movement doesn't fade into oblivion. We have to get back to PRINCIPLES, not policies.

To be a conservative in 2025 means to STAND

for Stewardship, protecting the wisdom of our Founders;
for Truth, defending objective reality in an age of illusion;
for Accountability, living within our means as individuals and as a nation;
for Neighborhood, rebuilding family, faith, and local community;
and for Duty, carrying freedom forward to the next generation.

A conservative doesn’t cling to the past — he stands guard over the principles that make the future possible.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You know, I'm so tired of being against everything. Saying what we're not.

It's time that we start saying what we are. And it's hard, because we're changing. It's different to be a conservative, today, than it was, you know, years ago.

And part of that is just coming from hard knocks. School of hard knocks. We've learned a lot of lessons on things we thought we were for. No, no, no.

But conservatives. To be a conservative, it shouldn't be about policies. It's really about principles. And that's why we've lost our way. Because we've lost our principles. And it's easy. Because the world got easy. And now the world is changing so rapidly. The boundaries between truth and illusion are blurred second by second. Machines now think. Currencies falter. Families fractured. And nations, all over the world, have forgotten who they are.

So what does it mean to be a conservative now, in 2025, '26. For a lot of people, it means opposing the left. That's -- that's a reaction. That's not renewal.

That's a reaction. It can't mean also worshiping the past, as if the past were perfect. The founders never asked for that.

They asked that we would preserve the principles and perfect their practice. They knew it was imperfect. To make a more perfect nation.

Is what we're supposed to be doing.

2025, '26 being a conservative has to mean stewardship.

The stewardship of a nation, of a civilization.

Of a moral inheritance. That is too precious to abandon.

What does it mean to conserve? To conserve something doesn't mean to stand still.

It means to stand guard. It means to defend what the Founders designed. The separation of powers. The rule of law.

The belief that our rights come not from kings or from Congress, but from the creator himself.
This is a system that was not built for ease. It was built for endurance, and it will endure if we only teach it again!

The problem is, we only teach it like it's a museum piece. You know, it's not a museum piece. It's not an old dusty document. It's a living covenant between the dead, the living and the unborn.

So this chapter of -- of conservatism. Must confront reality. Economic reality.

Global reality.

And moral reality.

It's not enough just to be against something. Or chant tax cuts or free markets.

We have to ask -- we have to start with simple questions like freedom, yes. But freedom for what?

Freedom for economic sovereignty. Your right to produce and to innovate. To build without asking Beijing's permission. That's a moral issue now.

Another moral issue: Debt! It's -- it's generational theft. We're spending money from generations we won't even meet.

And dependence. Another moral issue. It's a national weakness.

People cannot stand up for themselves. They can't make it themselves. And we're encouraging them to sit down, shut up, and don't think.

And the conservative who can't connect with fiscal prudence, and connect fiscal prudence to moral duty, you're not a conservative at all.

Being a conservative today, means you have to rebuild an economy that serves liberty, not one that serves -- survives by debt, and then there's the soul of the nation.

We are living through a time period. An age of dislocation. Where our families are fractured.

Our faith is almost gone.

Meaning is evaporating so fast. Nobody knows what meaning of life is. That's why everybody is killing themselves. They have no meaning in life. And why they don't have any meaning, is truth itself is mocked and blurred and replaced by nothing, but lies and noise.

If you want to be a conservative, then you have to be to become the moral compass that reminds a lost people, liberty cannot survive without virtue.

That freedom untethered from moral order is nothing, but chaos!

And that no app, no algorithm, no ideology is ever going to fill the void, where meaning used to live!

To be a conservative, moving forward, we cannot just be about policies.

We have to defend the sacred, the unseen, the moral architecture, that gives people an identity. So how do you do that? Well, we have to rebuild competence. We have to restore institutions that actually work. Just in the last hour, this monologue on what we're facing now, because we can't open the government.

Why can't we open the government?

Because government is broken. Why does nobody care? Because education is broken.

We have to reclaim education, not as propaganda, but as the formation of the mind and the soul. Conservatives have to champion innovation.

Not to imitate Silicon Valley's chaos, but to harness technology in defense of human dignity. Don't be afraid of AI.

Know what it is. Know it's a tool. It's a tool to strengthen people. As long as you always remember it's a tool. Otherwise, you will lose your humanity to it!

That's a conservative principle. To be a conservative, we have to restore local strength. Our families are the basic building blocks, our schools, our churches, and our charities. Not some big, distant NGO that was started by the Tides Foundation, but actual local charities, where you see people working. A web of voluntary institutions that held us together at one point. Because when Washington fails, and it will, it already has, the neighborhood has to stand.

Charlie Kirk was doing one thing that people on our side were not doing. Speaking to the young.

But not in nostalgia.

Not in -- you know, Reagan, Reagan, Reagan.

In purpose. They don't remember. They don't remember who Dick Cheney was.

I was listening to Fox news this morning, talking about Dick Cheney. And there was somebody there that I know was not even born when Dick Cheney. When the World Trade Center came down.

They weren't even born. They were telling me about Dick Cheney.

And I was like, come on. Come on. Come on.

If you don't remember who Dick Cheney was, how are you going to remember 9/11. How will you remember who Reagan was.

That just says, that's an old man's creed. No, it's not.

It's the ultimate timeless rebellion against tyranny in all of its forms. Yes, and even the tyranny of despair, which is eating people alive!

We need to redefine ourselves. Because we have changed, and that's a good thing. The creed for a generation, that will decide the fate of the republic, is what we need to find.

A conservative in 2025, '26.

Is somebody who protects the enduring principles of American liberty and self-government.

While actively stewarding the institutions. The culture. The economy of this nation!

For those who are alive and yet to be unborn.

We have to be a group of people that we're not anchored in the past. Or in rage! But in reason. And morality. Realism. And hope for the future.

We're the stewards! We're the ones that have to relight the torch, not just hold it. We didn't -- we didn't build this Torch. We didn't make this Torch. We're the keepers of the flame, but we are honor-bound to pass that forward, and conservatives are viewed as people who just live in the past. We're not here to merely conserve the past, but to renew it. To sort it. What worked, what didn't work. We're the ones to say to the world, there's still such a thing as truth. There's still such a thing as virtue. You can deny it all you want.

But the pain will only get worse. There's still such a thing as America!

And if now is not the time to renew America. When is that time?

If you're not the person. If we're not the generation to actively stand and redefine and defend, then who is that person?

We are -- we are supposed to preserve what works.

That -- you know, I was writing something this morning.

I was making notes on this. A constitutionalist is for restraint. A progressive, if you will, for lack of a better term, is for more power.

Progressives want the government to have more power.

Conservatives are for more restraint.

But the -- for the American eagle to fly, we must have both wings.

And one can't be stronger than the other.

We as a conservative, are supposed to look and say, no. Don't look at that. The past teaches us this, this, and this. So don't do that.

We can't do that. But there are these things that we were doing in the past, that we have to jettison. And maybe the other side has a good idea on what should replace that. But we're the ones who are supposed to say, no, but remember the framework.

They're -- they can dream all they want.
They can come up with all these utopias and everything else, and we can go, "That's a great idea."

But how do we make it work with this framework? Because that's our job. The point of this is, it takes both. It takes both.

We have to have the customs and the moral order. And the practices that have stood the test of time, in trial.

We -- we're in an amazing, amazing time. Amazing time.

We live at a time now, where anything -- literally anything is possible!

I don't want to be against stuff. I want to be for the future. I want to be for a rich, dynamic future. One where we are part of changing the world for the better!

Where more people are lifted out of poverty, more people are given the freedom to choose, whatever it is that they want to choose, as their own government and everything.

I don't want to force it down anybody's throat.

We -- I am so excited to be a shining city on the hill again.

We have that opportunity, right in front of us!

But not in we get bogged down in hatred, in division.

Not if we get bogged down into being against something.

We must be for something!

I know what I'm for.

Do you?

From Pharaoh to Hamas: The same spirit of evil, new disguise

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage.

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

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

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

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

Ancient evil, new clothes

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

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

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

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

A time for choosing

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

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

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

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

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Bill Gates ends climate fear campaign, declares AI the future ruler

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The Big Tech billionaire once said humanity must change or perish. Now he claims we’ll survive — just as elites prepare total surveillance.

For decades, Americans have been told that climate change is an imminent apocalypse — the existential threat that justifies every intrusion into our lives, from banning gas stoves to rationing energy to tracking personal “carbon scores.”

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates helped lead that charge. He warned repeatedly that the “climate disaster” would be the greatest crisis humanity would ever face. He invested billions in green technology and demanded the world reach net-zero emissions by 2050 “to avoid catastrophe.”

The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch.

Now, suddenly, he wants everyone to relax: Climate change “will not lead to humanity’s demise” after all.

Gates was making less of a scientific statement and more of a strategic pivot. When elites retire a crisis, it’s never because the threat is gone — it’s because a better one has replaced it. And something else has indeed arrived — something the ruling class finds more useful than fear of the weather.The same day Gates downshifted the doomsday rhetoric, Amazon announced it would pay warehouse workers $30 an hour — while laying off 30,000 people because artificial intelligence will soon do their jobs.

Climate panic was the warm-up. AI control is the main event.

The new currency of power

The world once revolved around oil and gas. Today, it revolves around the electricity demanded by server farms, the chips that power machine learning, and the data that can be used to manipulate or silence entire populations. The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch. Whoever controls energy now controls information. And whoever controls information controls civilization.

Climate alarmism gave elites a pretext to centralize power over energy. Artificial intelligence gives them a mechanism to centralize power over people. The future battles will not be about carbon — they will be about control.

Two futures — both ending in tyranny

Americans are already being pushed into what look like two opposing movements, but both leave the individual powerless.

The first is the technocratic empire being constructed in the name of innovation. In its vision, human work will be replaced by machines, and digital permissions will subsume personal autonomy.

Government and corporations merge into a single authority. Your identity, finances, medical decisions, and speech rights become access points monitored by biometric scanners and enforced by automated gatekeepers. Every step, purchase, and opinion is tracked under the noble banner of “efficiency.”

The second is the green de-growth utopia being marketed as “compassion.” In this vision, prosperity itself becomes immoral. You will own less because “the planet” requires it. Elites will redesign cities so life cannot extend beyond a 15-minute walking radius, restrict movement to save the Earth, and ration resources to curb “excess.” It promises community and simplicity, but ultimately delivers enforced scarcity. Freedom withers when surviving becomes a collective permission rather than an individual right.

Both futures demand that citizens become manageable — either automated out of society or tightly regulated within it. The ruling class will embrace whichever version gives them the most leverage in any given moment.

Climate panic was losing its grip. AI dependency — and the obedience it creates — is far more potent.

The forgotten way

A third path exists, but it is the one today’s elites fear most: the path laid out in our Constitution. The founders built a system that assumes human beings are not subjects to be monitored or managed, but moral agents equipped by God with rights no government — and no algorithm — can override.

Hesham Elsherif / Stringer | Getty Images

That idea remains the most “disruptive technology” in history. It shattered the belief that people need kings or experts or global committees telling them how to live. No wonder elites want it erased.

Soon, you will be told you must choose: Live in a world run by machines or in a world stripped down for planetary salvation. Digital tyranny or rationed equality. Innovation without liberty or simplicity without dignity.

Both are traps.

The only way

The only future worth choosing is the one grounded in ordered liberty — where prosperity and progress exist alongside moral responsibility and personal freedom and human beings are treated as image-bearers of God — not climate liabilities, not data profiles, not replaceable hardware components.

Bill Gates can change his tune. The media can change the script. But the agenda remains the same.

They no longer want to save the planet. They want to run it, and they expect you to obey.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn's Show Prep

Hard stand?! Donald Trump has the same immigration policy as Lindsey Graham

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

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

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.

Conservatism as stewardship

Rebuilding what is broken

A creed for the rising generation

Glenn Beck: Here's what's WRONG with conservatism today

Transcript

From Pharaoh to Hamas: The same spirit of evil, new disguise

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

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage.

Ancient evil, new clothes

A time for choosing

Bill Gates ends climate fear campaign, declares AI the future ruler

The Big Tech billionaire once said humanity must change or perish. Now he claims we’ll survive — just as elites prepare total surveillance.

The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch.

The new currency of power

Two futures — both ending in tyranny

The forgotten way

The only way