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

Doc Thompson: NYC Mayor de Blasio among those putting "overheated rhetoric that angers and divides people" in wake of NYPD shootings

December 22, 2014
Wilson

Writer

TheBlaze Radio’s Doc Thompson and Skip Lacombe took over The Glenn Beck Program this morning and started things off with a look at one of the weekend’s biggest stories - the execution of NYPD police officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos. The killings were done seemingly in retaliation for the deaths of Michael Brown and Eric Garner. With tensions between police and the communities they serve so strained, are leaders like NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio doing more harm than good?

Below is a rough transcript of this segment

DOC: I was leaning against the wall waiting for my smoothie. The lady about 60, 65, says to me, excuse me, sir. Are you in line? And I said, no, no, I'm sorry. I'm waiting for my smoothie. And she said, oh, okay, thank you. Merry Christmas. And she walked over and got in line with what I assumed was he grandson. She's Christmas shopping on Saturday. This was a black woman. And I thought to myself, having just gotten a text message minutes earlier about the huge protests that were going on at the mall of America over the Ferguson and Eric Garner cases out of New York and St. Louis. This woman didn't have a problem with me because I'm white. She didn't assume the worst. I didn't assume the worst about her. It was two people going through their lives respecting one another and saying, are you in line? No. I'm sorry. Line is right over there. Okay, thank you. Merry Christmas. Merry Christmas. It was a pleasant exchange. Because we were individuals. We weren't a white guy, a black lady. We weren't being divided up by that -- at that moment by the race baiters who seek to divide us for their own good. About 20 minutes after that, I was standing in the middle of this mall in Dallas where they have a huge like three-foot, two-foot pool of water. And as an attraction, kids can get inside these inflatable balls and they run in them on the water. And there's like four or five of them running and they'd fall down inside the ball and the water splashes up around it. It was really brought entertaining. I stopped with my wife and we're watching them, laughing at the kids. And a couple came up, stood next to me. They didn't have any kids that were playing. And started laughing at the kids as well and talking about it and said how much fun it looked and I engaged them in a conversation. And I they really need to make some of these for adults.

SKIP: I was going to say. I've seen the bouncy things on the water. They look like fun.

DOC: And the man, a black man and his wife, I was just telling her the same thing. And we engaged in a pleasant conversation the fun the kids were having a Saturday before Christmas. And it wasn't a black guy or a white guy trying to keep each other down, yelling at each other. We wrapped up the conversation by wishing each other a Merry Christmas. And this is what I experienced all day Saturday. And I kept thinking in my mind, juxtaposing that with all of the reports I'm getting out of New York in the Mall of America and other protests everywhere else. And I'm just walking through the mall going, why? And it comes down to what I said a few moments ago, and that is because when we think in those terms about what's going on in New York with the cops being shot and the protests and everybody upset, we're thinking in terms of groups of people. We're actually doing some of the very things that we're critical of people like Al Sharpton. We're thinking in groups. We say, stop segregating us, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. Stop race baiting. But if I allow them to do to to me, I'm doing the same thing. I'm thinking in terms of those people are marching because they're ticked off about something, instead of looking at each person as an individual. That's the key right there. Is unfortunate he all across our approximately all across our society we don't look at individuals. The courts don't. What happened to looking at each case and saying, you know what, there's mitigating circumstances here. It's not just three strikes and you're out. Looking at each case judging them based on the actions of that person and that case. That is the fail right now. We're allowing these race baiters like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Eric Holder and President Obama to do this to us. We're allowing Mayor de Blasio to do this to us. If you're not familiar with the story there, were two police officers who were shot execution style point blank by some nut with a gun. And he made references to shooting pigs, killing comes to, as some sort of retaliation for Ferguson and also Eric Garner. That's where we're at right now. It reached that level. Just days before Christmas that's where we're at. My name is Doc Thompson, along with my cohost Skip LaCombe, pinch-hitting for Glenn today. We're regularly heard on the radio six to nine eastern time. You can get it on I-Hart radio and the apps as well for it. Skip, what are the names of the Officers? The two officers that were shot, and this is really important, that we say their names. I don't know their names off the top of their head but Michael Brown, I know Eric Garner. We know their names. But we don't know the Officers off the top of our head.

SKIP: It was Rafael Ramos and then Wenjian Liu. I know I'm slaughtering the names.

DOC: These officers were just doing their job. Out on patrol. And as critical as I am over the race baiting -- it's important you remember, yeah, they may have contributed to the anti-cop sent minutes that some people have. They may have ginned some people up, gotten some people excitable. But this is not a fire in a movie theater situation. Did they contribute to it? Maybe. But the ultimate blame for what happens is on this nut who shot them. He has a history of mental illness. It is ultimately his fault. What I find so frustrating from the race baiters is how they started back pedaling and saying, oh, wait a minute. I -- categorically deny or categorically reject that this should have happened. The president said I categorically condemn the shooting of these police officers and it certainly wasn't necessary.

SKIP: Of course they are going to come out and say this. They can't give a quick little nod and say, yeah well, that's what happens.

DOC: It's unfortunate in a time of great tragedy, some would resort to irresponsible overheated rhetoric that angers and divides people. This is the criticism you should be heaping on President Obama and de Blasio and Eric Holder. See, everybody is failing at this. It's not just the cops being shot. It's not just Michael Brown. It's not just Eric Garner. It's all of it. And everybody is failing somewhere. There's enough fails in getting this wrong to go around. They're all missing this. President Obama did not pull the trigger. Did he gin some people up? Yeah. His biggest fail is by now back pedaling and saying, unconditionally condemning the murder of the two New York police officers and there's no justification for the slayings. Yes, there is a justification for the slayings if you listen to everything else Obama has said in the past. If I had a son, he would look like Trayvon Martin. He talks about the fails. He supported the wearing of the "I can't breathe" shirt by people like L e Bron James. What is that saying, then?

You're saying that it's true. You're saying if -- by supporting LeBron James wearing the t-shirt and the other protestors out there, you're saying it's true, that police officers are shooting black kids. And it's epidemic.

SKIP: Indiscriminately.

DOC: Right. And you know how you know? Because that's what the protestors have said. You cannot as president separate yourself from the protesters and say, well, I believe in some of what they say but all the other stuff is comploong.

SKIP: He likes to come around and say in a round-about way I'm not going to go and comment on these types of things but he will come out and talk about Lebron James wearing the "I can't breathe "shirt or people holding their hands up coming out of a football game. So he is come, saying I do stand with you and the supports. I can't breathe either or whatever.

DOC: There's no justification in the slayings? No, based on what Obama said. I there is justification. But he obviously does. When you stand with the protestors and say there are cops killing black kids and it's epidemic, which is part of their mantra, you can claim you want peaceful demonstrations all you want but who is going to say it's not justified to stop people even using deadly force if you believe they're going to kill people. Case in point. You're at your home sleeping. Minding your own business. A guy breaks in your house tonight. And attempts to kill you. Are you justified in using deadly force to stop him?

SKIP: Absolutely.

DOC: Absolutely. If cops are out there randomly shooting black kids, isn't it justified to stop them? With deadly force? Again, if you buy in to this crap President Obama and Eric Holder and others are saying. That cops are killing black kids simply because they're black. De Blasio is even worse. De Blasio said if it's unfortunate that in a time of great tragedy, some would resort to the irresponsible overheated rhetoric that angers and divides people. Wait a minute, wait a minute. Overheated rhetoric? What did de Blasio say? What did de Blasio say after Eric Garner? Do you remember? Both in press conference and in interviews, official interviews, he said, that he has warned his son to be careful.

That cops may shoot him because he's black.

SKIP: It's different for the black kids out there. You know, it's different if you're going out there. I'm worried about sending my kid out there with the horrible Officers -- this is from the mayor. The mayor of New York is saying the NYPD officers are indiscriminately attacking black people. What do you expect is going to happen? That is dangerous talk.

DOC: Mayor de Blasio said, police officers are shooting black kids. Or are inclined to shoot black kids simply because they're black. That's what he said. So who is really putting overheated rhetoric that angers and divides people? It's not me. I'm the one who said, reasonably, if you resist arrest, police are going to use force to arrest you and what happens? Sometimes it ends up being deadly. It's not pleasant. It's not fun. I feel bad for anybody who suffers. And their families as well. But the fact is both of those men resisted arrest. That's it. It's tragic. Maybe you need some better training. I don't balk at that. But you know who else needs training? Not just the police. Citizens.

SKIP: People, absolutely.

DOC: All people.

SKIP: Eric Garner and Michael Brown would still be alive today if they did just one thing. Listen. Listen to instructions from a police officer. If a cops tells you to do something, do it. Take them back in the legal court next year if it's some sort of a problem and you think they're in the wrong and you're in the right. Hell, the ACLU will probably help defend knew that case. But if a cop tells you to do something, you do it.

DOC: Right. Did he tell his son, did de Blasio tell his son that? Just listen to police officers? Did he tell white kids that? Because what, they're going to let off white kids if they resist arrest? It's asinine.

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.