The Democratic Party is a death cult, and they are killing off their own future

OLIVIER CHASSIGNOLE / Contributor | Getty Images

The Washington Post covered the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee last month with a story full of contempt for the rich. It vilified the corporate bigwigs flocking to town to rub shoulders with Donald Trump.

Twenty years ago, Wall Street and big business may have been in the pocket of the Republicans, but that’s no longer the case. All the large corporations belong to the World Economic Forum and the global public-private partnership that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have been pushing.

During the Republican gathering, the Post described oil and gas executives, crypto packers, and powerful Republican politicians engaging in hushed conversations in luxury suites about prospective tax breaks. The piece claimed Donald Trump would only serve America’s wealthiest. It painted a picture of greedy, evil businessmen making deals in dimly lit rooms. After all, as the Post likes to remind us, “Democracy dies in darkness.”

You will own nothing and be happy.

Even if the Post’s portrayal of the Republican convention’s attendees was entirely accurate, I would still prefer rich CEOs over the groups invading the Democratic National Convention in Chicago this week. Unsurprisingly, the Post and others have failed to scrutinize them with the same intensity.

According to the Capitol Research Center, 279 extremist groups were on the streets of Chicago as a part of a coalition to march on the convention Monday. Of that number, 147 have expressed support for or have ties to terrorist groups, such as Hamas, or terrorist attacks, including deadly attacks on Israel in October. The Hamas-allied and Iran-backed Marxist-Leninist group called the Popular Front for Liberation of Palestine is also on the ground, openly planning to replicate the violent 1968 Democratic National Convention.

Is anyone on the left going to cover these people?

Abortion, anti-family, anti-life

It's very hard to make Planned Parenthood look good, but these groups are giving them a run for their money. One is calling for Jewish blood, and the other is calling for baby blood. This is a blood death cult.

Planned Parenthood was parked outside the convention with vans, offering free vasectomies and abortions for those who are lucky enough to sign up before all the spots were filled.

Conservative media reacted to the news with shock and disgust. Libs of TikTok called Planned Parenthood’s efforts “demonic.” It is. The pro-life group Students for Life says this proves the far left is “the party of death.” That is true. But free abortions really shouldn’t be all that shocking. After all, pro-abortion groups like Aid Access, run by a team of European doctors, have been mailing abortion pills to women in all 50 states for as low as $100 for years.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, the Democratic Party’s vice presidential candidate, signed a bill into law last year that removed the requirement for doctors to use all reasonable measures to preserve the life and health of a baby who survives an abortion attempt. He signed a bill enabling doctors to let babies die in the hospital room after they’ve been born.

Moreover, the nominee for the president, Kamala Harris, made what I think is a slip of the tongue when she said: “When we invest in clean energy and electric vehicles and reduced population, more of our children can breathe clean air and drink clean water.”

Maybe it was a mistake for the prompter, but maybe she accidentally said the quiet part out loud. I’m sure the prompter said, “Reduce pollution.” But I'm also sure reducing the population is a part of the deal. Bill Gates and other WEF pundits have been promoting population control for decades, a remnant of eugenics that is being ushered into the 21st-century Democratic platform.

This is a death cult.

Return of the DINKs

The left has revealed it’s no longer just the party of killing babies. It's also the party of eliminating the possibility of having them at all. JD Vance received immense backlash from the left, recently calling out the “childless cat ladies” running the Democratic Party. He’s right. Democratic voters are more likely to not have children by choice. They aren’t childless due to medical reasons or the inability to conceive, but by choice, more than their Republican counterparts.

There was a University of Chicago poll that was conducted in 2022 that found 38% of Democrats had no children compared to 26% of those on the right. Like Planned Parenthood’s free abortions, it shouldn’t be surprising. This has been an ongoing movement pushed by the left for decades.

William A. Burly argued in a New York Times op-ed in 1990 that having “fewer children mean[s] a better life and a healthier environment.” He went on to say, “This truth should be taught to our kids," which, unfortunately, he was in the perfect position to do as the principal of an elementary school in New Milford, Connecticut, teaching yesterday’s Millennials, who are now reproducing today at staggeringly low levels. It’s no wonder since they were taught that having kids is a death sentence for personal freedom.

Thirty-four years after Burly’s op-ed appeared, Timothy Carney in the Washington Examiner wrote that New Milford has suffered such a decline in birthrate that it closed its community birthing center. Student population at the high school dropped so much that the JV and varsity football teams had to combine.

This is happening all throughout the country.

Why fight the fight when you can just eliminate the children?

In 2023, the term “DINK” resurfaced on TikTok after a long hibernation from the late 1980s. It stands for “dual income, no kids.” DINK videos of child-free couples bragging about the ample time and money they have to travel and eat at nice restaurants surpassed 33 million views last year. Social media’s glamorization of refusing to “reproduce” may push thousands of potential parents, who are grappling with the decision of whether to go “child-free,” over the edge. How different would fertility rates look today if TikTok videos romanticized parenthood instead?

Surely, a political party starving for power and control would realize that it needs a future populace to carry the torch, but it's aborting its own future voters. That party also stands directly alongside globalists who want “freedom thinkers” to have as little power as possible.

But having kids gives you just that.

Having kids makes you a free thinker because it gives you something to live for beyond yourself. It requires you to reflect on the future and the kind of country you want for your kids. It forces you to reflect on what citizenship means and how to teach that to the next generation. It gives you a reason to fight. It gives you the kind of autonomous power that globalist governments do not want citizens to have in any shape or form. Whether it’s financial freedom in owning a home or the intellectual freedom in knowing that my kid is mine, you can’t force me to teach them the dark principles and beliefs of the far left.

Ultimately, the far left knows that the much bigger and tougher battle is indoctrinating the sacred home where parents have complete control over the lessons and the principles that they choose to shape their kids.

So why fight the fight when you can just eliminate the children? You will own nothing and be happy. You will raise no one and be happy — like the DINK couple. You’ll have extra money to spend on gifts and lavish trips around the world, the freedom to stay up late, the freedom to live for “yourself.”

Will Trump hatred win?

But like so much of what the far left believes, the opposite is true.

I don’t know what will convince people of the lies that they’re buying into. The first night of the Democratic National Convention was filled with stunning, provable lies. Democrats are counting on their voters to be stupid, and they’ve laid the groundwork to deceive the rest.

They need you to hate Donald Trump more than you worry about your personal finances. They need you to hate Donald Trump more than their open borders. They need you to hate Donald Trump more than fentanyl and drugs on our streets and our children being killed by illegal aliens. They need you to hate Donald Trump more than exploiting your taxpayer dollars to house illegal immigrants in hotel rooms while veterans are on the streets. They need you to hate Donald Trump more than you notice the people who are strung out on drugs in our cities and suburbs. They need you to hate Donald Trump more than communism or the possibility of nuclear war. They need you to hate Donald Trump more than their cult of death.

When we get into the voting booth, do Americans actually hate Donald Trump more than what’s in their own best interest? Will you buy what they’re selling?

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Hunter pleads GUILTY, but did he get a pass on these 3 GLARING crimes?

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

Last week, Hunter Biden made the shocking decision to suddenly plead guilty to all nine charges of tax-related crimes after claiming innocence since 2018.

Hunter first tried an "Alford plead" in which a defendant maintains their innocence while accepting the sentencing, typically due to the overwhelming evidence against them. Hunter's Alford plead was not accepted after the prosecutors objected to the suggestion, and Hunter quickly pleaded guilty.

Glenn could not believe just how disrespectful this situation was to the justice system and the American people. After years of lying about his innocence, which only served to deepen the divide in our country, Hunter decided to change his tune at the last minute and admit his guilt. Moreover, many expect Joe Biden will swoop in after the election and bail his son out with a presidential pardon.

This isn't the first time Hunter's crimes have turned out to be more than just a "right-wing conspiracy theory," and, odds are, it won't be the last. Here are three crimes Hunter may or may not be guilty of:

Gun charges: Found guilty

This June, Hunter Biden was found guilty of three federal gun charges, which could possibly land him up to 25 years in prison. Hunter purchased a revolver in 2018 while addicted to crack, and lied to the gun dealer about his addiction. While Hunter could face up to 25 years in prison, it's unlikely to be the case as first-time offenders rarely receive the maximum sentence. That's assuming Joe even lets it go that far.

Tax evasion: Plead guilty

Last week, Hunter changed his plea to "guilty" after years of pleading innocent to federal tax evasion charges. Since 2018, Delaware attorneys have been working on Hunter's case, and just before the trial was set to begin, Hunter changed his plea. According to the investigation, Hunter owed upwards of $1.4 million in federal taxes that he avoided by writing them off as fraudulent business deductions. Instead, Hunter spent this money on strippers, escorts, luxury cars, hotels, and, undoubtedly, crack.

Joe's involvement with Hunter's foreign dealings: Yet to be proven

Despite repeated claims against it, there is ample evidence supporting the theory Joe Biden was aware of Hunter's business dealings and even had a hand in them. This includes testimony from Devon Archer, one of Hunter's business partners, confirming Joe joined several business calls. Despite the mounting evidence Joe Biden was involved in Hunter's overseas business dealings and was using his influence to Hunter's benefit, the Bidens still maintain their innocence.

Why do we know so much about the Georgia shooter but NOTHING about Trump's shooter?

Jessica McGowan / Stringer | Getty Images

It's only been a few days since the horrific shooting at the Apalachee High School in Winder, Georgia, and the shooter, Colt Gray, and his father, Colin Gray, have already made their first court appearance. Over the last few days, more and more information has come out about the shooter and his family, including details of Colt's troubled childhood and history of mental health issues. The FBI said Colton had been on their radar.

This situation has Glenn fired up, asking, "Why do we have an FBI?" It seems like every time there is a mass shooting, the FBI unhelpfully admits the shooter was "on the radar," but what good does that do? While it is great we know everything about the Georgia shooter, including what he got for Christmas, why do we still know next to NOTHING about Trump's would-be assassin? Here are three things we know about the Georgia shooter that we stilldon't know about the Trump shooter:

Digital footprint

Just a few days after the shooting, authorities have already released many details of the Georgia shooter, Colt Gray's, digital footprint. This includes extensive conversations and photographs revolving around school shootings that were pulled from Gray's Discord account, a digital messaging platform.

Compared to this, the FBI claims Thomas Crooks, the shooter who almost assassinated Donald Trump, had little to no digital footprint, and outside of an ominous message sent by Crooks on Steam (an online video game platform), we know nothing about his online activities. Doesn't it seem strange that Crooks, a young adult in 2024 who owned a cell phone and a laptop left behind no digital trail of any relevance to his crime?

Home life

The FBI has painted a vivid image of what Colt Gray's home life was like, including his troubling relationship with his parents. They released information about his parents' tumultuous divorce, being evicted from his home, several interactions with law enforcement and CPS, and abuse. Investigators also found written documents of Colt's related to other school shootings, suggesting he had been thinking of this for some time before committing the atrocity.

In contrast, we still know next to nothing about Crooks's home life.

How he got the weapon

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Colt Gray was gifted the rifle he used in the shooting from his father for Christmas last year. We also know Colt's father is an avid hunter and would take Colt on hunting trips. In 2023, Colt was the subject of an investigation regarding a threat he made online to shoot up a school. During the interview, Colt stated he did not make the threat. Moreover, his father admitted to owning several firearms, but said Colt was not allowed full access to them. The investigation was later closed after the accusations could not be sustained.

In comparison, all we know is that Crooks stole his father's rifle and did not inform his parents of any part of his plan. We have no clue how Crooks acquired the rest of his equipment, which included nearly a hundred extra rounds of ammunition, a bullet-proof vest, and several homemade bombs. How did Crooks manage to acquire all of his equipment without the FBI taking notice?

It feels like the FBI is either incompetent or hiding important information from the American people. Or both.

Join Glenn TONIGHT for BlazeTV's exclusive debate coverage!

Bill Pugliano / Stringer, Grant Baldwin / Stringer | Getty Images

Join Glenn TONIGHT, September 10, at 8 p.m. Eastern, for his LIVE coverage of the ABC News Presidential Debate!

Don't rely on the mainstream media to spoon-feed you their spin on the debate. Dodge the censorship and decide for yourself! Join the BlazeTV livestream tonight to get the debate coverage America deserves: the pure, uncensored truth. Plus you'll get to be the first to see Glenn's LIVE reaction to the debate as it goes down!

If you become a BlazeTV+ subscriber today, you can gain access to the live chat with your favorite hosts, including Glenn, Stu, Liz Wheeler, and more as they share their thoughts on the debate. Go to BlazeTV.com/debate and get $40 off of your annual subscription with code DEBATE. This is the largest discount we’ve ever offered, so don’t miss out! See you TONIGHT at 8!

You do NOT want to miss it!

These ‘conservative’ Glenn Beck critics are now supporting Kamala Harris

Drew Angerer / Staff, NBC NewsWire / Contributor, NBC NewsWire / Contributor | Getty Images

There’s a certain irony in how some of the loudest critics of Glenn Beck within the conservative ranks have now thrown their support behind Kamala Harris, a figure whose politics stand in stark contrast to the values they once claimed to uphold. Let's take a look back at these self-proclaimed guardians of conservatism, who once claimed Glenn Beck was a threat to the conservative movement, but are now backing the most far-left, radical candidate the Democrats have ever produced.

Adam Kinzinger

Adam Kinzinger was elected in 2010 as a Tea Party conservative, riding the wave of anti-establishment sentiment that defined the movement. However, by 2013, he was already distancing himself from the principles that got him elected. Criticizing Glenn Beck for labeling him a RINO, Kinzinger said, "The perception is, if you do one thing out of line with what is considered hard-core conservatism, or what Glenn Beck says or what Mark Levin says, then you are a RINO." Now, he’s taken his political shift to the extreme, endorsing Kamala Harris at the Democratic National Convention and praising her as a defender of democracy—all while claiming to be a Republican and a conservative.

Bill Kristol

Bill Kristol’s flip-flop is even more astounding. Kristol, who once took it upon himself to attack Beck for his warnings about radical Islam and creeping authoritarianism, now finds himself on the same side as Kamala Harris. Kristol’s past criticisms of Beck, comparing him to fringe elements like the John Birch Society, now ring hollow as Kristol himself becomes an apologist for the far left. His endorsement of Harris shows that his commitment was never to conservatism but to whatever political winds would keep him in the spotlight.

Jennifer Rubin

Jennifer Rubin is a prime example of how establishment figures at outlets like The Washington Post have masqueraded as conservatives while working to undermine genuine conservative voices. Rubin, who once criticized Beck by saying, "Rather than reflexively rising to his defense when questioned about Beck, why don’t conservatives call him out and explain that he doesn’t represent the views of mainstream conservatives?" was never truly aligned with conservative values. Her columns have consistently pushed establishment narratives, and now they read like PR pieces for the Democratic Party, especially when it comes to Kamala Harris. Rubin’s journey from supposed conservative commentator to one of the Biden administration’s staunchest defenders shows that her critiques of Beck were always about protecting her place within the Washington elite, not about upholding any real conservative principles.


Kinzinger, Kristol, and Rubin once posed as guardians of conservatism, warning about the supposed dangers of Glenn Beck. Now, they’ve endorsed Kamala Harris, a candidate whose policies are anathema to conservatism. Their criticisms of Beck were never about protecting conservative values—they were about steering the party back under their control. But the real target wasn’t just Beck; it was the audience he represents—everyday conservatives who challenge the status quo. These insiders have always seen that base as the real threat, and their actions make it clear who they were really trying to sideline.