Was the government planning for an influx of illegal immigrants on the border?

Sara Carter, senior Washington correspondent for TheBlaze, joined The Glenn Beck Program Monday night to talk to guest host Dana Loesch about the escalating crisis along the border. Recent reports have claimed that the Obama administration spent months preparing for a surge of illegals on the border. What did they know and how did they know it? Sara Carter went into detail on what her investigation has uncovered.

Below is a transcription of the segment:

Dana: Last week, we learned that the federal government was looking for vendors to help escort illegal immigrant children this past January. Here is the exact text posted to fedbizops.gov. It says, “ICE is seeking the services of a responsible vendor that shares the philosophy of treating all UAC with dignity and respect, while adhering to standard operating procedures and policies that allow for an effective, efficient, and incident free transport.”

It says also that “The Contractor shall provide unarmed escort staff, including management, supervision, manpower, training, certifications, licenses, drug testing, equipment, and supplies necessary to provide on-demand escort services for noncriminal/non-delinquent unaccompanied alien children ages infant to 17 years of age, seven (7) days a week, 365 days a year.”

The ad goes on to say that “Transport will be required for either category of UAC or individual juveniles, to include both male and female juveniles. There will be approximately 65,000 UAC in total: 25% local ground transport, 25% via ICE charter and 50%t via commercial air.” So who is paying for this? Oh right, we are. We’re paying for escorts to ease the illegal immigrants’ illegal entry into our country while a Marine sergeant named Andrew Tahmooressi sits in the Tijuana prison.

Now, how exactly did the U.S. government know that 65,000 illegal immigrant children would be arriving across our border? Now, Texas Governor Rick Perry, he couldn’t take Washington’s inaction and the seeming coordination of this border violating effort, so he ordered up a border surge, authorizing the Texas Department of Public Safety to commence surge operations along the border. It comes at a cost of $1.3 million per week, and it’s going to continue through the end of the year.

Attorney General Greg Abbott has requested an additional $30 million in federal funding from the Department of Homeland Security’s Jeh Johnson because at the very least, the federal government could maybe kind of help pay to work a problem that they created, right? The number of illegal immigrants crossing the border is staggering. Get this, border patrol caught 160,000 illegal immigrants crossing the border in the Rio Grande Valley in the first eight months of the fiscal year alone, right?

Health professionals have raised awareness and a lot of concerns asking a lot of questions about the transmission of disease because those crossing likely haven’t received the same immunizations that U.S. children have received. So why are these numbers increasing? One report is that it’s due to amnesty rumors. Maybe it’s due to our lax reaction to the crime of illegal crossing. I mean, we’re loading illegal immigrants onto planes and buses and shipping them to other parts of the Southwest to sort of kind of like spread the flood.

There are stories of border patrol agents acting as surrogate parent instead of policing the border. Of everyone I spoke to who has been to the border who has worked with law enforcement in detaining immigrants as they illegally cross, there is one great absence. All of the people who claim that denying illegal entry into our country is a great evil, none of them are actually at the border helping with this humanitarian crisis.

I know of stories of church pastors in border towns who are sheltering kids to protect them from drug cartels and the elements. I see those; I don’t see the advocates of open borders and amnesty though. I see them using the government to do their charity, and that’s pretty much the extent of it. I mean, does this look like charity to you? Does this look like charity?

Are any of these people even down south to volunteer to process paperwork, care for the detained children? Are they there to help walk immigrants through the legal way to immigrate? No, instead they claim that a desire to observe law is cruel and unusual.

We love immigration in America, and we have every right to be discriminatory that we want the best of the best, the best laborers, the best business owners, the brightest students, but we don’t even require that. We just say can you come here legally? We’re not Ireland with their beyond restrictive immigration policy. We’re not even close to Mexico, whose immigration laws are more draconian than our own.

We simply ask that people respect our sovereignty, respect our citizens, and follow the legal path of immigration the same as every other immigrant. The open border policy and amnesty chaos, and make no mistake, that’s exactly what it is, it’s designed chaos to make policy happen fait accompli. Their anything-goes policy on immigration is actually hurting the people they claim to want to help, the immigrants crossing illegally.

Now, Sara Carter from our D.C. bureau joins us to delve into this issue. So Sara, first off, thanks so much for joining me.

Sara: Thanks Dana.

Dana: I was reading, as you just heard, talking about the fedbizops or whatever .gov, where ICE actually put on, it’s like a Craigslist ad basically asking for escorts. This was back in January. How on earth did they have such keen insight into what our needs would be at the border now, Sara?

Sara: Yeah, you know, Dana, I think a lot of people actually didn’t think this was true. I think they thought that when this showed up on Weasel Zippers, you know, on a website, that they thought this was a false ad. It was not. I contacted my sources at ICE official headquarters. Barbara Gonzalez confirmed that it was in fact an official RFI from ICE and that they were looking for these escorts.

I dug a little deeper and found out that actually there were reports done as early as January 2013 predicting this surge. The administration was well aware of the fact that there was something coming across the border. When you look all the way back to 2010, unaccompanied minors was a little over 5,000. Then we see a big jump in 2011, and now we’re expecting 90,000 unaccompanied minors this year. I think what was surprising to a lot of people, now mind you, this is a DHS, these were DHS studies, U.S. intelligence studies last year that I was able to find out.

They had conducted at least two in January and February, and then in October there was actually an official meeting with high-level DHS officials about this. And the only thing that they were really concerned about according to sources that I spoke with was bed space. They were not concerned at all with notifying the local communities about this increased surge that they were expecting. They were not concerned about notifying the appropriate authorities or putting any stopgap measures into stopping these folks from coming over.

And you mentioned a lot of the reasons and a lot of the potential harm that comes from this large immigrant surge coming from Central America into the United States.

Dana: What is making these numbers jump up so much? I mean, you had said, and you’ve covered this and done such a great job for TheBlaze.com. There are stories that there were ads, that some of these immigrants saw, I guess, like in their – tell me the story about that. Like what is, like ads in their newspapers in Mexico?

Sara: Yes, and it wasn’t in Mexico. It’s actually in Central America. I felt very fortunate that I was able to go out with border patrol sources that were able to get me right to the front lines so when a lot of the illegal immigrants crossed or illegal migrants crossed the border I was able to talk to them. I speak Spanish fluently, and they were very open.

None of them were running away from the border patrol. In fact, they were walking right up to border patrol officials and turning themselves in because they actually believed when they cross the border, once they touched American soil that they would be able to stay here. And when I asked them, you know, you made this long journey, some of them took 15 days, some of these young kids rode on top of a train they call the beast by themselves and then got picked up by cartels along the way and human trafficking organizations that eventually brought them all the way up to the border.

The family units which are the mothers with their children, they went through the same kind of, I mean, really horrific journey from home all the way to the United States border until they cross the Rio Grande, and they said they saw it in newspapers, they heard it on their television on Univision, which is one of the major Spanish language television networks, on their TV shows.

There was even talk of flyers actually being distributed in some Central American towns saying go to America now, and I wish I could get my hands on one of these flyers. I asked all of the migrants if they had any on them, and they didn’t. You know, obviously they took the flyers and got rid of them on their long journey, but they actually had some flyers in some of the towns.

And they said that family members were actually contacting them from the United States and saying now is the time to come in, the administration is not going to send you back. And look, by all accounts, if you’re an unaccompanied minor, they’re not going to send you back. And if you’re here with your children, they’re not going to send you back right now.

You know, despite what we hear coming out of the Obama administration, when you talk to ICE officials, when you talk to DHS officials about this, when you talk to border patrol officials, there are no plans to send a lot of these folks back.

When you think about how many people are released in the United States every year, every year, just with an order to appear in court, piece of paper, and they never show up at court, and they never get returned back home, what makes us think that right now we’re going to return children where we have no idea where their families are back to their countries of origin? I would be surprised if the Obama administration moves on this.

Dana: And how many, Sara, I know that they are loading up illegal immigrants on trains and planes and sort of spreading the deluge that’s coming across the border. Do we know how many are being relocated?

Sara: Oh yeah, I mean thousands. We’re looking at estimates right now, inside the Rio Grande Valley sector alone are over 1,000 illegal immigrants crossing a day, over 36,000 a month. This is just in the Rio Grande Valley area. So this is not including, this includes actually unaccompanied minors which are about 200-plus, give or take, a day.

On the morning that I left Texas, Dana, and I love Texas, and I’ve got my own pair of cowboy boots too, but on the morning that I left Texas, Wednesday morning, 300 people showed up in one shot right at Anzalduas State Park across the Rio Grande. I mean, this was just one group. I think this was like the biggest group, what they call groupings, that they had so far. So 300 people just showed up in one shot right across the river. That doesn’t include all the people coming across the river all day and night and the people preparing to cross.

So what we’re seeing here is an enormous crisis, and you’re right, health officials are very concerned because a lot of the people are being, and for the people themselves, they’re being moved and transported without any type of medical check or medical clearance. And I think this is something that we need to be concerned with.

Dana: What is being done at least, I mean, because you see all the, I mean, these photos are just, like it’s hard to see it, you know, these people in detention centers. It’s hard, I mean, regardless of how you feel about the issue, but at the same time, you know, I listen to what a lot of these health professionals have been saying.

And Sara, you’ve talked about this. We don’t know, obviously they probably aren’t on the same immunization schedule as children in the United States. There are a lot of legitimate health concerns that are here. Is there anything being done at the border to remedy? I mean, what can be done? I mean, honestly, it’s an overflow.

Sara: Well, it is an overflow. This is what’s happening, when the border patrol actually gets like a group, and they bring them to like, let’s say, the McAllen station or the Brownsville station where they’re going to hold them for 48 hours, it’s really the border patrol officials who are doing the first medical clearances. These are men and who the border patrol will tell you, we have no medical training whatsoever. If we see bumps, if we see someone that’s sick, we’re going to send them to a doctor.

There’s very few doctors that they have actually checking out these patients. I know that the U.S. Coast Guard has sent some medical professionals to the facilities. I know that the WHO is trying to do some vaccinations, but they’ve already uncovered multidrug resistant tuberculosis, hepatitis, yeah, I mean, cholera, yeah, it goes on and on.

Dana: I know John Boehner said that he wants to bring in the National Guard. Is that something that’s going to, Boehner finally said this, do you think that’s something that’s going to happen?

Sara: I definitely think it’s something that’s possible if the flow doesn’t stop because part of the problem is not the people that are just coming across and turning themselves into border patrol, it’s all of the open spaces, which is why Governor Rick Perry was so concerned and had, you know, the Texas Department of Public Safety out there because a lot of the areas aren’t being guarded by border patrol.

While border patrol is taking care of all of these unaccompanied children and people, the drug cartels are moving contraband into the United States. They’re also seeing heavy flow of other traffic.

Dana: And exploiting these people too.

Sara: That’s right. That’s absolutely right, Dana.

Dana: Excellent coverage on this, Sara. I so appreciate it, and thanks for joining me this afternoon. We’re definitely going to watch all of these developments and turn to you for our information as well, so thank you for that. Have a great afternoon.

Sara: Thank you.

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?

How America’s elites fell for the same lie that fueled Auschwitz

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.