Glenn interviews Texas Senatorial hopeful Ted Cruz

Glenn has said before that he think Ted Cruz understands what the country is facing economically and, if elected, will help put a stop to some of the big spenders in Congress. Cruz joined Glenn on radio to discuss his campaign - as well as some attack ads targeting him that are so bad they seem like an SNL parody.

Transcript of interview:

GLENN: We're just listening to these amazing Ted Cruz, anti‑Ted Cruz commercials.

PAT: Oh, they're horrible.

GLENN: Here in Texas. You have to hear just one of them.

PAT: Here's one of them.

GLENN: See if one word sticks out.

VOICE: The competition Ted Cruz is also lawyer Ted Cruz. Cruz is helping this Chinese company put this American manufacturer out of business. Cruz's Chinese client stole American blueprints.

VOICE: The jury found them liable for stealing our blueprints.

VOICE: But with lawyer Ted Cruz's help, the Chinese keep counterfeiting and Ted Cruz keeps getting paid.

VOICE: There's too many people like Ted Cruz.

PAT: That's because he's a lawyer. Have you ever noticed how closely lawyer and liar sound?

GLENN: Many of the same letters in "lawyer" and "liar."

STU: (Laughing.)

PAT: Quite a few, in fact.

GLENN: Is it a coincidence that not only lawyer, but trial lawyer politician Ted Cruz.

PAT: Following in the footsteps of other trial lawyers like John Adams.

GLENN: John Adams was a lawyer.

PAT: Who tried to overthrow the U.S. Government.

STU: Traitor.

PAT: Call Ted Cruz and ask him why he's a traitor lawyer, lawyer traitor.

GLENN: Lawyer, politician trial lawyer.

PAT: Lawyer.

GLENN: Revolutionary lawyer.

PAT: Lawyer.

GLENN: (Laughing.) And this is all done by Dewhurst who is just ‑‑

PAT: A nightmare.

GLENN: ‑‑ a nightmare. Texas, come on, come on, you're better than this. Ted Cruz is on the ‑‑ lawyer Ted Cruz.

PAT: Thank you, Glenn. Lawyer. Ted Cruz, who's a lawyer.

GLENN: Have you noticed, Ted, how many letters in "lawyer" are also in "liar"?

PAT: And liar?

CRUZ: I've got to say y'all have a future in comedy and attack ads.

GLENN: Really?

CRUZ: That is right in front of you.

GLENN: Will you defend us when we're in court trying to put American companies out of business?

PAT: Call Ted's office and ask him, why do you defend people? Why?

STU: (Laughing.)

GLENN: Why do you defend?

PAT: Is it because you're a defense lawyer?

GLENN: (Laughing.)

CRUZ: Well, we know it's silly season when we're 19 days out from the election.

STU: Yeah, we probably think this is a lot more funny than Ted does.

PAT: Probably.

GLENN: Ted Cruz isn't laughing when we call him lawyer.

PAT: So Ted, tell us about the Chinese company, the Chinese company and why you defended them.

CRUZ: Look, the ad that you played is filled with lies, and Dewhurst is spending $3 million saturating the airwaves with it.

PAT: Yep.

CRUZ: It's a lie.

PAT: I hear it every day, several times a day.

STU: All the time.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: I have to tell you I've met with people in Texas, I was for Ted Cruz but have you heard he's a lawyer?

PAT: He's a lawyer?

GLENN: He's a lawyer politician.

CRUZ: It is filled with lots of lies, the biggest one of which is they tell you that the opposing party in this lawsuit is, quote, an American manufacturer.

PAT: Mmm‑hmmm.

GLENN: What they don't tell you is 20 years ago, he moved his factory to China.

PAT: Oh, my gosh.

CRUZ: This is, in fact, a lawsuit between two Chinese tire factories.

PAT: Really?

CRUZ: Really.

PAT: That is conveniently missing from the ad.

CRUZ: They just omitted, he incorporated his company in the Channel Islands, a notorious tax haven, and he spends eight months a year in China running his factory there.

PAT: What was the underhanded technique that was used supposedly? Because one of them, one of them is that supposedly some underhanded technique was used to defend them?

CRUZ: Which is that the company filed an appeal, and there are actually three tire companies in the case. All three appealed, including the plaintiff, including the fellow in the ad. He appealed.

PAT: Wow.

STU: Wow, he used the same underhanded technique?

PAT: As lawyer Ted Cruz?

GLENN: There's too many people like you, Ted Cruz.

CRUZ: Well, and you know what's interesting, he also doesn't tell people that I didn't argue the case. I wasn't the lead lawyer. And if you look at a case I did argue last year in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on Chinese counterfeiting. I represented a major manufacturer against a Chinese company that stole a U.S. patent.

GLENN: So let me translate. He was using his tricks again in a courtroom, as a lawyer.

STU: On the same topic.

PAT: Again, with China being involved.

CRUZ: It IS hard to argue with that.

GLENN: We can turn it against you any way you throw it at us.

GLENN: And you know what? If I were Dewhurst and I had millions and millions and millions of dollars, I would turn it against you every single way. I mean, it wouldn't matter anymore. "Do we have enough lawyers? Don't we have enough Dewhursts in Washington already"?

PAT: Boy, that's for sure.

GLENN: We do.

PAT: We do have more than enough Dewhursts in Washington already.

GLENN: Tell me about ‑‑ tell me why you should be there, Ted.

CRUZ: Because our nation is in crisis and we've got too many go‑along‑to‑get‑along establishment politicians to Washington. We need conservatives and with he need fighters.

GLENN: Are you a Club For Growth guy?

CRUZ: Club For Growth has endorsed me, Freedom Works has endorsed me, the five strongest conservatives in the U.S. Senate, Jim DeMint, Mike Lee, Rand, Paul and Pat Toomey, and Tom Coburn have endorsed me. And just an hour ago, you may not have seen the news, Governor Sarah Palin endorsed me.

PAT: Wow, that's nice.

GLENN: Now let me ask you this: Texas, what the hell is wrong with you! How are the poll numbers doing?

CRUZ: The poll numbers are great. It is a two‑man race between me and David Dewhurst. He is the moderate establishment. He is a tax‑and‑spend Republican.

PAT: Mmm‑hmmm.

CRUZ: And our numbers are surging because conservatives are uniting behind Tea Party activists, Republican women. And I'll tell you the Dewhurst campaign is terrified, after Mourdock's win in Indiana.

GLENN: They should be.

CRUZ: Because as you know, all the pundits said that the moderate incumbent there was unbeatable and the people rose up and said, look, we're tired of these spineless jellyfish that don't believe anything.

GLENN: But how do you honestly, how do you combat somebody who has unlimited funds that are running ad campaigns? I mean, these ad campaigns make you ‑‑ Ted, I don't know you well but I've met you several times. You're not a monster and you're certainly not the guy that is portrayed in these ads.

CRUZ: Right.

GLENN: And, you know, if I didn't know you and I was just kind of a casual person, I'd think... he's a lawyer.

PAT: A Chinese operative.

GLENN: I mean, I would think you were the worst monster on the planet. How do you fight this without a lot of money against a guy who has an unlimited amount of cash?

CRUZ: Yeah, he's putting a million bucks of his own money in. You know the answer is support from the people all over Texas and all over the country. We've raised over $5.2 million from 19,000 people. Every time I'm on your show, Glenn, I've got to tell you hundreds and hundreds of people all over Texas and all over the country come to our website, TedCruz.org. They contribute. And it's how we're keeping up because this is conservatives all over the country.

GLENN: But here ‑‑ hang on. Here's something interesting. I mean, here's a guy who's running for the Senate seat from Texas and again one of his dirty tricks: He doesn't spell "Cruz" the way you would normally spell "cruise." Another dirty underhanded trick. So if you're going the Website and you're trying to find "cruise" ‑‑

PAT: Yeah. TedCruz.org, you would spell it Ted Cruz, C‑r‑u‑z, if I'm not mistaken.

CRUZ: That is exactly right.

PAT: Isn't that the underhanded trick you're using?

GLENN: Underhanded trick.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: It's not "cruise" like, hey, I'm putting it in cruise control.

PAT: No.

GLENN: It's that kind of underhanded stuff ‑‑

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: ‑‑ that we've had enough of.

PAT: Tell us, what's the biggest difference between you and David Dewhurst? Why should Texas vote for you as opposed to him, the guy everybody knows?

CRUZ: I'm a conservative and I'm a fighter. I've spent my entire life fighting for the Constitution and fighting for freedom. As the solicitor general for Texas for five and a half years serving under Greg Abbott, we led the nation fighting for conservative opinions, we defended the Ten Commandments and won, defended the "Pledge of Allegiance" and won, defended the Second Amendment and won. And we stood up and fought the world court and the United Nations and the president of the United States defended U.S. sovereignty and won.

PAT: Against Mexico, right?

CRUZ: Mexico and actually 90 nations against us. Mexico sued the United States and the world court.

GLENN: You did that as a lawyer.

PAT: As a lawyer. Tell us about that case because that ‑‑

GLENN: I didn't know you were the guy who did that.

PAT: Yeah, that was an important case. Tell us about that one.

CRUZ: Well, it was a case that began tragically in Houston. Two teenage girls were gang‑raped and murdered.

PAT: 1993?

CRUZ: Yeah.

PAT: Yeah.

CRUZ: And one of the gang rapists and murderers was named José Medellin. He was an illegal alien. And he was convicted and what happened was Mexico sued the United States and the world court, and the world court issued an order to the United States to reopen the convictions of 51 murderers across the country.

PAT: And in my final straw with George W. Bush, he actually sided with Mexico on this.

CRUZ: It was heartbreaking. I think he received some very, very poor advice.

PAT: Yep.

CRUZ: And he signed an order that attempted to order the state courts to obey the world court.

GLENN: This is ‑‑

PAT: Unbelievable.

GLENN: This is ‑‑

PAT: That was unbelievable.

GLENN: This is where I really lost it with George Bush.

PAT: Me, too.

GLENN: When this stuff was starting to happen, this was when I was like, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.

PAT: What?

GLENN: What the hell was George Bush doing? And you're the guy who fought it and argued it in the Supreme Court?

CRUZ: Yeah, I argued it twice. And as you know, one of the things we need ‑‑

PAT: And won, by the way.

GLENN: Yes.

CRUZ: Is we need leaders who have the backbone to stand up not just to Democrats but to fellow Republicans when they go off the reservation and they are not honoring the Constitution.

GLENN: Thank you.

PAT: Exactly.

GLENN: Thank you. Okay, now look. Last Tuesday Indiana, the Tea Party and Freedom Works and everybody else got together and they got Dick Lugar out.

CRUZ: Yep.

GLENN: We're not fighting the Democrats. We're fighting the Republicans. Got Dick Lugar out. Now the eyes are going to turn to Texas. Can the Tea Party, can freedom lovers, can constitutionalists, can real conservatives stand and make it past somebody who has millions of dollars and deep pockets to smear this guy left and right? This guy doesn't have deep pockets.

PAT: An established, moderate establishment candidate in David Dewhurst.

GLENN: Big time. Big time.

PAT: That's who that guy is. I mean, "moderate" is giving him the benefit of the doubt.

GLENN: Big time. This is ‑‑ you know, this is another one of those RINOs, this is one of those GOP "I'll play whatever game they want me to play" and Ted Cruz is not. Running for U.S. Senate out of Texas. If you want to donate, if you want to help him, go to TedCruz.org, C‑r‑u‑z‑e. TedCruz.org.

PAT: C‑r‑u‑z.

GLENN: What did I say?

PAT: No E.

GLENN: Okay. Another dirty trick?

PAT: Yes. Still another one.

GLENN: Oh, my goodness. I don't know if I can ‑‑

PAT: It's a long U sound without the E at the end. How did he pull that off?

GLENN: He's being outspent 9‑1. Early voting starts on Monday all over Texas. Dewhurst needs 50% of the vote to avoid a runoff which would most likely be with Ted. Concentrate your efforts one at a time. We've got to take the Senate back and that means even taking it back from the Republicans. We've got to have people who understand what we're facing, and Ted is one of those guys. Thank you, Ted. I appreciate it, man.

CRUZ: It's always a pleasure. You guys are fighting for freedom and making a difference. And you know what? A lot of the media said the Tea Party was dead. Tuesday proved that wrong. And on May 29th, 19 days from today, Texas is going to prove it wrong. We're going to send a strong conservative and a fighter to the Senate. And you have my word: Texas will lead the fight to stop the Obama agenda, to defend free market principles, and to restore the Constitution.

GLENN: And you have my word that if you don't hold that up, you will... you'll receive the wrath, the wrath of this program and everybody who voted for ya.

CRUZ: And Glenn, I am asking you, hold me accountable.

GLENN: Oh, we will. You don't have to ask. It's our pleasure.

CRUZ: Because if I am anything other than leading the fight with arrows up and down my torso.

GLENN: Oh, yeah.

CRUZ: I mean, Glenn, as you know my dad fled oppression in Cuba. I mean, he was imprisoned. He was tortured. Freedom for me is not an abstract concept in a book.

GLENN: Yeah, yeah. Is your dad still alive?

CRUZ: He is. He's a pastor ‑‑

GLENN: We'll get him on a plane and we'll personally have him punch you in the face if you start screwing around in Washington. No, I mean it. It will be your worst nightmare. I mean it.

CRUZ: I'm much more scared of my dad than I am of you.

GLENN: You should be.

CRUZ: Because I'd have to look him in the eyes if I didn't fight for freedom and help turn this around.

GLENN: All right. Ted, thanks a lot. I appreciate it, man.

PAT: TedCruz.org.

GLENN: Again is lawyer Ted Cruz.

PAT: TedCruz.org.

Is the U.N. plotting to control 30% of U.S. land by 2030?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

A reliable conservative senator faces cancellation for listening to voters. But the real threat to public lands comes from the last president’s backdoor globalist agenda.

Something ugly is unfolding on social media, and most people aren’t seeing it clearly. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) — one of the most constitutionally grounded conservatives in Washington — is under fire for a housing provision he first proposed in 2022.

You wouldn’t know that from scrolling through X. According to the latest online frenzy, Lee wants to sell off national parks, bulldoze public lands, gut hunting and fishing rights, and hand America’s wilderness to Amazon, BlackRock, and the Chinese Communist Party. None of that is true.

Lee’s bill would have protected against the massive land-grab that’s already under way — courtesy of the Biden administration.

I covered this last month. Since then, the backlash has grown into something like a political witch hunt — not just from the left but from the right. Even Donald Trump Jr., someone I typically agree with, has attacked Lee’s proposal. He’s not alone.

Time to look at the facts the media refuses to cover about Lee’s federal land plan.

What Lee actually proposed

Over the weekend, Lee announced that he would withdraw the federal land sale provision from his housing bill. He said the decision was in response to “a tremendous amount of misinformation — and in some cases, outright lies,” but also acknowledged that many Americans brought forward sincere, thoughtful concerns.

Because of the strict rules surrounding the budget reconciliation process, Lee couldn’t secure legally enforceable protections to ensure that the land would be made available “only to American families — not to China, not to BlackRock, and not to any foreign interests.” Without those safeguards, he chose to walk it back.

That’s not selling out. That’s leadership.

It's what the legislative process is supposed to look like: A senator proposes a bill, the people respond, and the lawmaker listens. That was once known as representative democracy. These days, it gets you labeled a globalist sellout.

The Biden land-grab

To many Americans, “public land” brings to mind open spaces for hunting, fishing, hiking, and recreation. But that’s not what Sen. Mike Lee’s bill targeted.

His proposal would have protected against the real land-grab already under way — the one pushed by the Biden administration.

In 2021, Biden launched a plan to “conserve” 30% of America’s lands and waters by 2030. This effort follows the United Nations-backed “30 by 30” initiative, which seeks to place one-third of all land and water under government control.

Ask yourself: Is the U.N. focused on preserving your right to hunt and fish? Or are radical environmentalists exploiting climate fears to restrict your access to American land?

  Smith Collection/Gado / Contributor | Getty Images

As it stands, the federal government already owns 640 million acres — nearly one-third of the entire country. At this rate, the government will hit that 30% benchmark with ease. But it doesn’t end there. The next phase is already in play: the “50 by 50” agenda.

That brings me to a piece of legislation most Americans haven’t even heard of: the Sustains Act.

Passed in 2023, the law allows the federal government to accept private funding from organizations, such as BlackRock or the Bill Gates Foundation, to support “conservation programs.” In practice, the law enables wealthy elites to buy influence over how American land is used and managed.

Moreover, the government doesn’t even need the landowner’s permission to declare that your property contributes to “pollination,” or “photosynthesis,” or “air quality” — and then regulate it accordingly. You could wake up one morning and find out that the land you own no longer belongs to you in any meaningful sense.

Where was the outrage then? Where were the online crusaders when private capital and federal bureaucrats teamed up to quietly erode private property rights across America?

American families pay the price

The real danger isn’t in Mike Lee’s attempt to offer more housing near population centers — land that would be limited, clarified, and safeguarded in the final bill. The real threat is the creeping partnership between unelected global elites and our own government, a partnership designed to consolidate land, control rural development, and keep Americans penned in so-called “15-minute cities.”

BlackRock buying entire neighborhoods and pricing out regular families isn’t by accident. It’s part of a larger strategy to centralize populations into manageable zones, where cars are unnecessary, rural living is unaffordable, and every facet of life is tracked, regulated, and optimized.

That’s the real agenda. And it’s already happening , and Mike Lee’s bill would have been an effort to ensure that you — not BlackRock, not China — get first dibs.

I live in a town of 451 people. Even here, in the middle of nowhere, housing is unaffordable. The American dream of owning a patch of land is slipping away, not because of one proposal from a constitutional conservative, but because global powers and their political allies are already devouring it.

Divide and conquer

This controversy isn’t really about Mike Lee. It’s about whether we, as a nation, are still capable of having honest debates about public policy — or whether the online mob now controls the narrative. It’s about whether conservatives will focus on facts or fall into the trap of friendly fire and circular firing squads.

More importantly, it’s about whether we’ll recognize the real land-grab happening in our country — and have the courage to fight back before it’s too late.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

URGENT: FIVE steps to CONTROL AI before it's too late!

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

  

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn: Only Trump dared to deliver on decades of empty promises

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

The Islamic regime has been killing Americans since 1979. Now Trump’s response proves we’re no longer playing defense — we’re finally hitting back.

The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.

Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.

It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.

Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.

The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.

The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.

Operation Midnight Hammer

The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.

   USAF / Handout | Getty Images

To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.

As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.

They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.

If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.

This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.

What comes next

We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.

Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.

That would be catastrophic.

The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.

The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?

Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.

Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.

Now we pray

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.

The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.

He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Globalize the Intifada? Why Mamdani’s plan spells DOOM for America

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

If New Yorkers hand City Hall to Zohran Mamdani, they’re not voting for change. They’re opening the door to an alliance of socialism, Islamism, and chaos.

It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

   Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

 

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.