Marco Rubio tells Glenn why he thinks all abortion should be abolished

While Glenn was on his doctor-recommended hiatus last month, he had an off-the-record chat with Senator Marco Rubio. And he ended up really liking him, thinking he was a decent, honest guy who did not flinch from the hard questions. Rubio joined Glenn on radio Monday for an on-the-record interview so you can decide what you think for yourself.

Among other things, the outspoken pro-life candidate candidly expressed his feelings on why the practice of abortion is equivalent to murder and should be abolished.

"I believe a human being is entitled to life, irrespective of the circumstances in which that human being was conceived in and so forth," Rubio said.

Acknowledging that other people don't hold that view and in order to save lives in this country, Rubio said he has supported bills in the past that have exceptions in them, while he personally feels very strongly that every human is entitled to the protection of his or her life.

"If we as a society start deciding which lives we will protect and which lives we will not, we put ourselves on a very slippery, dangerous slope," Rubio said.

Glenn also delved into Rubio's positions on immigration, ISIS and NSA spying. Listen to the full segment or read the transcript below.

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

GLENN: Welcome to the program, Senator Marco Rubio. How are you, sir?

MARCO: I'm well. Thanks for having me on.

GLENN: So how did you feel last week when the embassy opened up and we raised the flag in Cuba?

MARCO: Well, I felt -- you know, a part of you feels like I wish that was happening in a free Cuba, where it was really a celebration. Instead, it felt like a recognition of an oppressive government. That they're now going to be admitted to the club of normal countries or normal governments. And it's unfortunate. I almost felt like we were surrendering to the idea that the Cuban people will forever be doomed and condemned in living under a repressive regime. You know, we have a government that will go. They will give some lip services to freedom and democracy. Basically we won't press them to do anything. And the result is, badly, I fear, that we're one step closer to this sort of regime that is now in Cuba, becoming a permanent fixture and remaining the only people in the western hemisphere who don't elect their leaders.

GLENN: Well, Fidel Castro said that we owed them reparations.

MARCO: Yeah. Well, and that's exactly one of the problems I have with it. The United States is going to be all these things that is good for the Cuban government. More travel. More remittances. More telecommunication. More commerce. The Cuban government has said thank you. We're not changing anything, by the way. And, in fact, you owe us money. I mean, that's basically been their attitude.

And people think Cuba is some benign Cold War relic. It's much deeper than that. In Cuba, they're harboring dozens of fugitives from American justice. For example, this woman who killed a police officer in New Jersey was jailed, escaped from jail. Took off to Cuba. They have been harboring her now for almost 30 years. There are multiple people who have come from Cuba to the U.S. They steal money and Medicare fraud. When they're about to get caught, they leave back to Cuba. There's dozens of them hiding over there. Two of their generals have been indicted for the murder of unarmed American civilian pilots and international air space in 1996, during the Brothers to the Rescues was down, they then -- (phone breaking up) both the Chinese and the Russians on the island of Cuba, and they used that as an outpost to spy on central commands, southern commands, special operations commands, all three of which are located in Florida. And, of course, NASA. So this is not -- (breaking up) -- last year was caught smuggling weapons to North Korea. Now they'll just have more dollars.

GLENN: So here we have a -- I've never seen our country on the wrong side as much as we are now. The president is pushing for Iran. And saying that we -- we have to do this. John Kerry came out and said, if -- if the Senate doesn't ratify this agreement, that we will lose the status of the reserve currency for the world.

MARCO: Yeah, that's silly. That's a silly thing for him to say. I mean, it's just absurd. Everyone laughed at him when he said it, including people around the world in the financial market. Our reserve status has nothing to do with our relationship with Iran or anyone else for that matter. And it's just really an absurd statement.

But going back to the point that you made, that's exactly right. I mean, the argument that the president is making is, either we expect this deal or we'll be the pariah, not Iran. Again, it's ridiculous. I know America has saved the world at least two times in the last 100 years. I don't remember when the world saved America. And so I think we need to enter these things with that sort of reality in mind. And the second point I would make is he is now also saying -- he's now isolating Israel. (breaking up) -- that opposes this deal. And in essence, trying to isolate Israel (breaking up) status on them if they don't go along with this thing. So it really is bizarre. I really never thought I would live to see the day where we had a president and an administration so hostile towards Israel and in general some of our allies. It's really unbelievable.

GLENN: You were on CNN and you said some of the most remarkable things I think I've heard any politician say on -- on Planned Parenthood and on abortion.

You took him on and I think sliced him to ribbons. But you made the -- you made the point that even in cases of rape and incest, abortion is murder and it should be abolished.

MARCO: Look, a human being, in my view, this is how I deeply feel. It's not a political issue, this whole abortion debate. I believe a human being is entitled to life, irrespective of the circumstances in which that human being was conceived in and so forth. And in order to be ideological consistent, I hold that position that you've just outlined. Now, I recognize that other people don't hold that view. And in order to save lives in this country, I have supported bills in the past that have exceptions in them. And I know a lot of people who are pro-life that support exceptions because they feel it goes too far.

You know, I support saving the life of the mother. But I think, in my view, I personally feel this very, very strongly, that every human life is entitled to the protection of our life. And if we as a society start deciding which lives we will protect and which lives we will not, we put ourselves on a very slippery, dangerous slope.

I actually think, in 100 years or so, or less, future generations will look back at this time in history and say it's really unbelievable that so many unborn human beings, their lives were ended, simply because they didn't have a birth certificate, couldn't hire a lawyer, didn't vote, or we couldn't see them yet. And I just feel very strongly about that. And again, for me, it's not a political issue. It's an issue that speaks to the core of our values.

GLENN: I have to tell you, Marco, speaking to Senator Marco Rubio, I am gravely concerned about how history will remember this time period and us. It's why we're going and meeting in Birmingham, Alabama, to stand up against Planned Parenthood. Or I should say for life in all of its forms. And that includes ISIS. What's happening in ISIS, it's a culture of absolute death. And the New York Times ran a story on Friday that said -- it showed how these ISIS fighters are coming off of the battlefield. And one of them was documented in praying before he bound and gagged a 12-year-old girl, raped her, and then knelt at the bedside and thanked Allah for the opportunity to do that.

It's sick what's going on. And what are we doing about it?

MARCO: Well, first of all, it is a grotesque perversion of any faith for that matter. What's happened with ISIS. And we've read in the last week how they've now come up with these theological interpretations that justify what they're doing both to women and in general. And it's an outrage. And as far as what we're doing about it, clearly not enough. I continue to believe that it's up to the Sunnis themselves to defeat ISIS. ISIS is a radical Sunni movement. And there are Sunni nations that are willing to do it. But they require America to be willing to help them. Because they don't have the capacity. They want more airstrikes from us. They want intelligence information. Logistical support. But they have to go in on the ground and defeat them themselves. And they understand that they are battling for the future of that region. It is their women. It is their men. It is their children. It is their cities that are being taken over by these radical Muslims. And it has to be defeated. It will not stop. This movement will not stop and say, okay, we're satisfied with the land we have now. They will continue to grow and spread until they are defeated. So we have a very simple choice here, either they win or we win. There is no accommodation for them, nor should there be with something as evil as this.

GLENN: Senator, the one thing -- there's two things that we have to bring up that are sticking points. With me and several people in the audience. And one of them is, I believe you're a patriot. I believe that you believe in America. I believe that you want to do the right thing. And I would hope that you would believe the same thing about me. But we have to have a rule of law and the Constitution. And you don't have a problem with the NSA spying. And I think it's one of the most dangerous things we have ever done. If you want to get -- if you want to find out what somebody is doing, then get a warrant. And we've even streamlined the warrant. But to have this mass NSA collection and spying on average Americans is -- is frankly frightening. Not -- not for how we're using it now, but how it can be used in the future.

MARCO: Well, I think those concerns are always legitimate. There have been times in the past where American intelligence programs have been abused for political purposes and otherwise. And it's illegal. And if someone is caught doing that, they should be caught and thrown in jail. I understand your concern about the capacity that it exists. I would argue the capacity also exists outside of government, with some of the technology that's now being used is readily available.

GLENN: But they don't -- but the argument there is, they don't have the right or the capability to round people up. And in more than one occasion, this government has rounded people up that they've disagreed with.

MARCO: Oh, you mean in the past.

GLENN: Yes.

MARCO: Yeah. Obviously as a society, we would always be vigilant about those sorts of things. And I understand the civil liberties concern, I do. I balance it with the very significant concern that we have about the fact that ISIS and other radical movements are actively recruiting Americans who have never traveled abroad, living among us.

A week ago, an honor student that just graduated high school, married someone who I guess had been radicalized, and they were headed to Syria to join ISIS. And you see here, rightfully, that there are individuals in America who, even as you and I are talking right now, they are now planning to kill Americans. Service men and women. Attack bases. Whatever it takes. We know this is happening. I'm a member of the US Senate Intelligence Committee. I review this information on a regular basis. And it's what led me to say, we got to know more about these people than they know about us. And I will admit, it is a difficult balance, having programs robust enough to prevent an attack, but also capable of protecting the civil liberties. So I'm not saying we take it lightly or ignore it or in any way allow these things to run amuck, but I do know that there will eventually be an attack on this homeland of great significance at some point. It's not a question of if, it's a question of when. And we have to try to prevent or delay that from happening as much as possible. And that's why I believe having these tools at our disposal are so important.

GLENN: Could I ask, this is -- this is one of the emails that came in to me. And it's in Arabic and also in English. And it's from an American citizen, or at least somebody who is living here.

The day will come when we capture you cross-worshiping, impure redneck polytheists of the United Snakes. Not only will we kill you. But we will take your women as slaves and all of your properties, and blood will be lawful for us. Have patience because the hour will not be established until we have removed your falsehood pagan religion from the world and killed many of you.

This comes from Arabic, along with several quotes of the Koran.

Wouldn't we be better off honestly saying the truth about what this is and then saying the truth about some of the mosques here in America?

MARCO: No doubt. 100 percent. And I think that is -- look, if there was a radical movement that was using Baptist churches or Catholic churches to organize, we would have no qualms about spying on them or monitoring them and watching them. I don't think we can allow political correctness to endanger the lives of Americans. And on that, there is no doubt and no quarrel with me. I agree 100 percent that that's the fact. And I think that law enforcement would say the same thing. So there's no doubt that we need to be clear about it. Does that mean -- of course, it doesn't mean that every Muslim or even the majority of Muslims in America are radicalized. You know, I've met very patriotic Muslims in this country who love the United States. But we cannot ignore the fact that there is a significant element in it. (breaking up)

GLENN: Hello?

MARCO: And we can't ignore them. (breaking up) So we're not not going to spy on a mosque because of, you know, political correctness.

GLENN: Right. We're having a horrible connection with you.

MARCO: Can you hear me better now?

GLENN: Yeah, we can. Let me ask you. Do you regret being a part of the Gang of Eight?

MARCO: I wouldn't use the word regret. I would say that we learned lessons about reality of where we stand as a country on that issue. We're not going to make any progress as long as Barack Obama is president. We're not going to solve immigration. And we're not going to be able to do it in one massive piece of legislation. And the reason being is, people just don't trust the government will ever do even what the law says. You can pass a law that promises a fence, people will say, they'll never build it. So it's clear --

GLENN: Well, we have passed that law.

PAT: Yeah, 2006.

GLENN: Yeah.

MARCO: Not only have they passed the law, but then they don't fund it. So you have to fund it. And the second part of it is on an entry/exit tracking system (breaking up), that's been delayed as well. So my point is -- the lesson I took from all that is, you're going to have to do it. You can't pass a law that says it will do it. You're going to have to do it. And once people see that you've done it and illegal immigration is under control, then I think they'll be willing to talk about what we do next. But you won't any progress until you do it. And that's just a fact. Whether people like it or not, that is the way it is. And anyone who doesn't accept simply is simply deluding themselves or they're lying.

GLENN: Okay. Senator, it's good to have you on the broadcast. And I hope to be able to spend some more time with you. We're -- we are excited to see that you are doing as well as you are in the polls. There is about four of the guys that we like. And currently at the top of the polls, Cruz and you are towards the very top of the polls. And we're glad to see that. There is one that we're not so glad that is at the top of the polls right now. But I don't think --

MARCO: These things all work out in time.

PAT: Yeah, it just takes a little time.

MARCO: Yeah. Well, thanks for having me on. I enjoyed it very much.

GLENN: You bet. Thanks, Senator. Buh-bye.

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.

Why the White House restoration sent the left Into panic mode

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Presidents have altered the White House for decades, yet only Donald Trump is treated as a vandal for privately funding the East Wing’s restoration.

Every time a president so much as changes the color of the White House drapes, the press clutches its pearls. Unless the name on the stationery is Barack Obama’s, even routine restoration becomes a national outrage.

President Donald Trump’s decision to privately fund upgrades to the White House — including a new state ballroom — has been met with the usual chorus of gasps and sneers. You’d think he bulldozed Monticello.

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s ‘visionary.’

The irony is that presidents have altered and expanded the White House for more than a century. President Franklin D. Roosevelt added the East and West Wings in the middle of the Great Depression. Newspapers accused him of building a palace while Americans stood in breadlines. History now calls it “vision.”

First lady Nancy Reagan faced the same hysteria. Headlines accused her of spending taxpayer money on new china “while Americans starved.” In truth, she raised private funds after learning that the White House didn’t have enough matching plates for state dinners. She took the ridicule and refused to pass blame.

“I’m a big girl,” she told her staff. “This comes with the job.” That was dignity — something the press no longer recognizes.

A restoration, not a renovation

Trump’s project is different in every way that should matter. It costs taxpayers nothing. Not a cent. The president and a few friends privately fund the work. There’s no private pool or tennis court, no personal perks. The additions won’t even be completed until after he leaves office.

What’s being built is not indulgence — it’s stewardship. A restoration of aging rooms, worn fixtures, and century-old bathrooms that no longer function properly in the people’s house. Trump has paid for cast brass doorknobs engraved with the presidential seal, restored the carpets and moldings, and ensured that the architecture remains faithful to history.

The media’s response was mockery and accusations of vanity. They call it “grotesque excess,” while celebrating billion-dollar “climate art” projects and funneling hundreds of millions into activist causes like the No Kings movement. They lecture America on restraint while living off the largesse of billionaires.

The selective guardians of history

Where was this sudden reverence for history when rioters torched St. John’s Church — the same church where every president since James Madison has worshipped? The press called it an “expression of grief.”

Where was that reverence when mobs toppled statues of Washington, Jefferson, and Grant? Or when first lady Melania Trump replaced the Rose Garden’s lawn with a patio but otherwise followed Jackie Kennedy’s original 1962 plans in the garden’s restoration? They called that “desecration.”

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s “visionary.”

The real desecration

The people shrieking about “historic preservation” care nothing for history. They hate the idea that something lasting and beautiful might be built by hands they despise. They mock craftsmanship because it exposes their own cultural decay.

The White House ballroom is not a scandal — it’s a mirror. And what it reflects is the media’s own pettiness. The ruling class that ridicules restoration is the same class that cheered as America’s monuments fell. Its members sneer at permanence because permanence condemns them.

Julia Beverly / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s improvements are an act of faith — in the nation’s symbols, its endurance, and its worth. The outrage over a privately funded renovation says less about him than it does about the journalists who mistake destruction for progress.

The real desecration isn’t happening in the East Wing. It’s happening in the newsrooms that long ago tore up their own foundation — truth — and never bothered to rebuild it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.