Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Glenn interviews the cable king, Bill O’Reilly

October 03, 2012
Wilson

Writer

Bill O’Reilly has a new book out “Killing Kennedy” which was a follow up to his hit success “Killing Lincoln” and prompted Glenn to question Bill’s fascination with ‘killing’ books. The pair also previewed the debate tonight - how should Mitt Romney handle the tough questions? O’Reilly explains on radio today.

Rough transcript of interview below:

GLENN: Bill O'Reilly continues his fascination with presidential assassinations. I don't know what it is. First it was Lincoln. Now it's Kennedy. And I don't know. McKinley is next. I'm not sure what he's working on. Number one best-selling author. The number one book in America. Been on the best-selling list for 53 weeks, I don't know.

STU: 53,000 weeks.

GLENN: His epic book, "Killing Lincoln". Now being followed by "Killing Kennedy", and it is just as good. We have we have Bill O'Reilly on the phone. Hello Bill.

STU: He'll be here in a few minute.

GLENN: What do you mean?

STU: He's apparently decided there's a breakfast emergency. Maybe there's a delicious hash brown he's finishing off.

PAT: He might be finish up the research on killing McKinley.

GLENN: I may not talk about his book now. Here's the truth. I haven't Reddit. I don't like it.

STU: How would you know.

STU: I think he's on now.

GLENN: Bill now that you're late.

CALLER: Wait. Wait. I've been calling you guys.

GLENN: Don't even.

CALLER: Oh.

GLENN: What is the weird thing with your fascination with the deaths of former presidents. Are you working on killing McKinley now.

CALLER: Did you read the book.

GLENN: I have to apologize to you. I haven't.

CALLER: You haven't read it.

GLENN: I know you sent it to me early.

CALLER: Most of this book is when he was alive. The worthiness we knock out all of the myths. All of the garbage, all of the rumor. All of the innuendo.

GLENN: No you don't. You don't knock it out. There was one part of the story I was interested in.

CALLER: Which was?

GLENN: If I would have read the book I would have known. This is the one guy that you couldn't nail down because were you on his track and he committed suicide.

CALLER: Fascinating story. 1976 I'm working at a WFAA in Dallas, Texas. A friend of mine. He calls he's got a call he's a Russian emigre. He was teaching at a college. This guy knows a lot about Oswald. I immediately try to track shield. He runs. He dodges. He knows I'm after him. So I go to his house. A number of times. Finally and this was against the law, I actually broke into his house and nobody knows that. I'm telling the Glenn Beck program.

GLENN: Just hold on a second. Eric Holder let's get him on the phone.

CALLER: I was dressed like a Black Panthers so he's not going to do anything. So.

CALLER: So the back door the backsliding door was open and I opened it, and I stepped into his living room I guess it was. And there was nobody there. I pounded on the door, and so I had a cameraman with me. There's blood on the rug. So I thought this was really strange. Told my assignment editor. Don't ever do that again, and don't tell anybody. We got word that he was visiting his daughter in south palm beach Florida. Where did the blood come from.

CALLER: I don't know.

GLENN: You didn't do anything about that.

CALLER: Because you broke in we don't you want to do anything. I head out to palm beach Florida.

GLENN: I'd like to apologize to the parents of the missing girl in the 1970s who's body was never found. Bill O'Reilly let it happen.

CALLER: My friend is trying to get shield to serve him a subpoena. So we both of us are heading out to the house. I get to the house. And shield blew his brains out second floor of his daughter Alexandra's house.

PAT: While you're there.

CALLER: I'm there. And then the palm beach police drove there. I have not been able to define shield was hanging around Lee Harvey Oswald which was the lowest rung. Now, a sleuthed it. I've done anything. We knew that shield had ties to the C.I.A.. he had ties to the older Bush. That is one of the few things we have not been able to nail down in "Killing Kennedy".

GLENN: So Oswald was a loan shooter.

CALLER: He shot him by himself.

PAT:

GLENN: Was he a Russian agent?

CALLER: There is no evidence of that.

GLENN: Was why did he go over to the Soviet Union.

CALLER: He went over to the Soviet Union because he was a loser and Communist. He thought he was going to have a great life over there. That's where he met his wife in Minsk. The F.B.I. shadowed him. He was a Socialist Communist kook. If he was a Russian agent he wouldn't have had so much trouble getting into Cuba. He went down to Cuba. We traced every bit of him. You learn all of this fascinating.

GLENN: If you're offering to have somebody read it to me I'll take that. I'm trying to create jobs.

CALLER: I'll have somebody come to see you.

GLENN: We're going to the election in a few minute.

CALLER: You're going to love this book. This is right up your alley. Because.

GLENN: Bill.

CALLER: It unmasks the whole government and the C.I.A. what they did the bay of pigs. Kennedy ordering the assassination of DM. This is right where you live.

GLENN: I love Lincoln. I love, and I hate myself for saying it. But I loved your book about Lincoln.

CALLER: All right.

GLENN: I'll read another one.

CALLER: Good. You're the man for it.

GLENN: Let me ask you the one other question. You say there was a turning point in Kennedy's life, and it was the death of his son.

CALLER: Almost like your story. It's almost like the Glenn Beck story. Here's Kennedy.

GLENN: He started the network.

CALLER: Whatever Kennedy wants to do, whatever babe he wants to go after, whatever.

GLENN: If it moves he's interested.

CALLER: So Kennedy is one of the most popular men in the world. He's doing whatever he wants to do. It doesn't matter if it hurts his wife his children whatever, he does it.

GLENN: Tell me when it gets to the story like me.

CALLER: Remember your days your in Connecticut.

CALLER: Something happens to JFK. What happens is his baby dies Patrick. And we spend a lot of time in the book on that.

GLENN: Did you think about naming the book killing Patrick.

CALLER: No. Because with this there are a lot the other things. Thank you for the suggestion. So the poor baby.

GLENN: You know --

CALLER: Dies, and JFK is profoundly, and I mean profoundly affected. He changes. He changes -- he doesn't become a saint overnight like you did. But his whole outlook changes and his presidency changes.

GLENN: So did he become a Republican.

CALLER: Almost. He wanted to cut taxes. He wanted to limit government. But you'll see in the book how what happens there.

GLENN: So Bill, we're going to talk about the election in a second. The name of the book is "Killing Kennedy", and killing McKinley is coming up, and shooting but missing Truman. I'm sure will be the follow up.

PAT: Stabbing Caesar is down the roads.

GLENN: We'll get to the election.

CALLER: . You done making fun of me.

GLENN: You're a machine.

CALLER: "Killing Kennedy" is number one. "Killing Lincoln" is still number 4.

BREAK

GLENN: Bill O'Reilly, you play Mitt Romney here for a second.

CALLER: All right.

GLENN: Mr. Romney you were recorded as saying 47% of the people are basically lazy and you don't care about them. How do you explain that?

CALLER: What I was saying to a group of my supporters was that there is a certain mindset among people who support my opponent President Obama of entitlement. They want free stuff. Now, 47% probably too high. I was just speaking off-the-cuff. But there is no question that many Americans right now want a nanny state, and there is the poster boy for -- you can't say the poster guy for the nanny state President Obama. And these people would never vote for me because I am someone who believes in competition, who believes in capitalism and self-reliance. Those are the things that I stand on, and that's what has made America great, and that's why President Obama's administration has weakened the economy, and take away from that.

GLENN: What you just said appeals to me. We used to be self-reliance. But 47%, and that is probably too high. 47% are on the government Dole in some way or another. And they're not paying taxes, and that number is growing every single day, and I'd say I'll bet that there is at least 10% maybe as high as 20% who're just like I don't want to pay taxes. I don't want to do any work. I'm totally cool with this system.

CALLER: I think one out of five think they are owed something. I want to do my Internet stuff. I want to flounce around. I'm not going to study in school. I'm not going to work hard. I'm not going to learn a trade, and so give me my house. Give me my food, and give me, give me, give me, and that's growing. That's a growing part of our population.

GLENN: You have been doing television since 1884. And.

CALLER: Since Rutherford B. Hayes.

GLENN: You've seen these elections over and over again. The spin of the polls is remarkable. I happen to believe that the model is wrong. All of the polls in the last three or four years have been six points wrong minimum. Six points.

CALLER: Well. In a month we'll know whether you're correct or not.

GLENN: Hold on hold on.

CALLER: All right.

GLENN: Mr. O'Reilly this is the no twirling around zone. What I want to know from you is take the polls as they are. They're all within the margin of error. They're 47-45. 45-45. Whatever. So it's a dead-heat. A. Have you ever seen an election this close for this long where it is just locked pretty much locked-in a dead-heat, and B, why isn't the media saying this is the closest election that they've seen. It's never this close. Why are they saying it is Obama.

CALLER: That's not anything new. So the national media and the urban newspapers are rooting for the President. So I think that's established beyond a reasonable doubt. And dimmest Americans know that. The problem is that you have if you are not a fan of the President's is that Mitt Romney has not taken the fight to him. And that's what everybody is hoping to see tonight in the debates. They're hoping to see Mitt Romney on fire coming out say look I don't want to be disrespectful but the President is ruining the country not just in the short-term but in the long-term, and the culture of entitlement that he embraces the attitude of where's mine. I don't care about the country. I want my stuff and I want it now, and I want other people to give it to me, is taking root. And we have to confront the fact that our President is exploiting people who don't want or can't provide for themselves. If Mitt Romney would do that tonight and bring it right to his doorstep, and back it up with facts. Look at the expenditures, look at the spending, look at the waste. Look what's coming down the road.

GLENN: He wins if he does it. This weekend George Washington O'Reilly and Stewart the debate. "Killing Kennedy" the book is on sale now.

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.

How private stewardship could REVIVE America’s wild

Jonathan Newton / Contributor | Getty Images

The left’s idea of stewardship involves bulldozing bison and barring access. Lee’s vision puts conservation back in the hands of the people.

The media wants you to believe that Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) is trying to bulldoze Yellowstone and turn national parks into strip malls — that he’s calling for a reckless fire sale of America’s natural beauty to line developers’ pockets. That narrative is dishonest. It’s fearmongering, and, by the way, it’s wrong.

Here’s what’s really happening.

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized.

The federal government currently owns 640 million acres of land — nearly 28% of all land in the United States. To put that into perspective, that’s more territory than France, Germany, Poland, and the United Kingdom combined.

Most of this land is west of the Mississippi River. That’s not a coincidence. In the American West, federal ownership isn’t just a bureaucratic technicality — it’s a stranglehold. States are suffocated. Locals are treated as tenants. Opportunities are choked off.

Meanwhile, people living east of the Mississippi — in places like Kentucky, Georgia, or Pennsylvania — might not even realize how little land their own states truly control. But the same policies that are plaguing the West could come for them next.

Lee isn’t proposing to auction off Yellowstone or pave over Yosemite. He’s talking about 3 million acres — that’s less than half of 1% of the federal estate. And this land isn’t your family’s favorite hiking trail. It’s remote, hard to access, and often mismanaged.

Failed management

Why was it mismanaged in the first place? Because the federal government is a terrible landlord.

Consider Yellowstone again. It’s home to the last remaining herd of genetically pure American bison — animals that haven’t been crossbred with cattle. Ranchers, myself included, would love the chance to help restore these majestic creatures on private land. But the federal government won’t allow it.

So what do they do when the herd gets too big?

They kill them. Bulldoze them into mass graves. That’s not conservation. That’s bureaucratic malpractice.

And don’t even get me started on bald eagles — majestic symbols of American freedom and a federally protected endangered species, now regularly slaughtered by wind turbines. I have pictures of piles of dead bald eagles. Where’s the outrage?

Biden’s federal land-grab

Some argue that states can’t afford to manage this land themselves. But if the states can’t afford it, how can Washington? We’re $35 trillion in debt. Entitlements are strained, infrastructure is crumbling, and the Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, and National Park Service are billions of dollars behind in basic maintenance. Roads, firebreaks, and trails are falling apart.

The Biden administration quietly embraced something called the “30 by 30” initiative, a plan to lock up 30% of all U.S. land and water under federal “conservation” by 2030. The real goal is 50% by 2050.

That entails half of the country being taken away from you, controlled not by the people who live there but by technocrats in D.C.

You think that won’t affect your ability to hunt, fish, graze cattle, or cut timber? Think again. It won’t be conservatives who stop you from building a cabin, raising cattle, or teaching your grandkids how to shoot a rifle. It’ll be the same radical environmentalists who treat land as sacred — unless it’s your truck, your deer stand, or your back yard.

Land as collateral

Moreover, the U.S. Treasury is considering putting federally owned land on the national balance sheet, listing your parks, forests, and hunting grounds as collateral.

What happens if America defaults on its debt?

David McNew / Stringer | Getty Images

Do you think our creditors won’t come calling? Imagine explaining to your kids that the lake you used to fish in is now under foreign ownership, that the forest you hunted in belongs to China.

This is not hypothetical. This is the logical conclusion of treating land like a piggy bank.

The American way

There’s a better way — and it’s the American way.

Let the people who live near the land steward it. Let ranchers, farmers, sportsmen, and local conservationists do what they’ve done for generations.

Did you know that 75% of America’s wetlands are on private land? Or that the most successful wildlife recoveries — whitetail deer, ducks, wild turkeys — didn’t come from Washington but from partnerships between private landowners and groups like Ducks Unlimited?

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized. When you break it, you fix it. When you profit from the land, you protect it.

This is not about selling out. It’s about buying in — to freedom, to responsibility, to the principle of constitutional self-governance.

So when you hear the pundits cry foul over 3 million acres of federal land, remember: We don’t need Washington to protect our land. We need Washington to get out of the way.

Because this isn’t just about land. It’s about liberty. And once liberty is lost, it doesn’t come back easily.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.