What Did Glenn's Listeners Think About Trump's Acceptance Speech?

Glenn mixed it up on his radio program Friday following Donald Trump's acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention.

"We're going to try something different today because I want to know how the speech that Donald Trump did played to you, the average American in your home. I know how it played in my home . . . we want to hear from you," Glenn said.

As one might expect, many on the right heralded the speech, while those on the left lambasted it.

RELATED: Bill Maher on Trump’s Scary RNC Speech: ‘He Looked a Lot Like Mussolini’

"What went through your mind last night? Good or bad? What did you think America?" Glenn asked.

Here's what callers had to say:

Wallace in Kansas

Well, after 76 minutes, I actually had to go back and find a hard copy because I heard the word "Constitution" one time. I never heard the word "freedom," never heard the word "liberty." What I heard was a mashing of the last year of Donald Trump's stump speeches. I wasn't inspired, you know, very much.

I will vote for Donald Trump. A vote is not an endorsement of everything he stands for; it's just Hillary Clinton scares me so bad. If Hillary gets in, here's what I know: This country has a 100 percent chance of getting shot in the head with Hillary Clinton. With Donald Trump, it's a 99 percent. I just hope I'm in the 1 percent.

Darren in Wyoming

Well, we're screwed. We got a high school bully and a crook running as our two leaders that are going to direct our country. And the difference between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, about 40 pounds. So they're one and the same --- more empty promises.

Derek in Utah

Going into the speech, I thought it was going to be the same thing --- build a wall, do this, do that --- coming out, the thing that really stuck in my mind was law and order, how many times he brought that up, how he was going to restore law and order. And in some ways, I believe that is good with a lot of the things that have been going on with the police forces, but at the same time, it really scares me on how he plans on accomplishing that.

I have never been a Trump supporter. Some things I can relate to 100 percent because there's so much anger, so much hate going on in America right now, and he really tapped into that. Even with his aggressive tone, with his position that he was taking there on stage, he was embodying what a lot of Americans feel right now and bringing that out. So they were able to tap into that, but it really worries me on how he's going to accomplish that. And that's the biggest thing I took away, that I'm a little bit scared about our freedoms and our liberties.

Carol in New York

My frame of mind going into it was, with our options, I was feeling desperate. I'm going to vote, but what decision am I going to make? I wanted to like him. No, I absolutely wanted to like him. The problem is that I don't, and I don't trust him. But there was something last night that changed my heart about him. I guess I'm -- I'm -- I love God, and I love our country. I run a food pantry. I've been a giver my whole life, and not because I'm a good person, but because God is good. And I believe our country needs to become stronger by uniting. If everyone would just be kinder and stronger and meet the need they see in front of them, I believe there would be no needs.

I see that people are running out of options. And he's someone, last night, that made me see that it's possible to have options again, and that gave me hope. And for the first time, I'm like, 'Okay. Alright. Now I'm going to listen.'

It was my gut feeling. I felt he was a little bit humble. I'm concerned about him not being a good guy. But I saw his family, and I'm starting to put all the pieces together. Like, well, you know, with the media the way it is, what do we really hear about anybody? You know, we just hear what they want us to hear. I'm becoming paranoid.

Brian in Oklahoma

I'll be completely honest with you, I have not been a Donald Trump supporter. I was a Ted Cruz supporter. So what I heard last night was a very strong understanding and itemization of the problems our country is having. And a lot of these problems that you listed, Obama won't even utter the words. So when I listened to him last night, he's uttering like the problem with unemployment, the problem with trade deals, the problem with illegal immigration. It's really hard to go in and give you specifics on a trade deal. You know, we're going to Page 405, Paragraph C, you know, Section whatever, and we're going to strike that line. People are most of the time not going to understand that. It's going to go over their head. But he understands that the trade deal with NAFTA and the TPP are lousy deals. It hurts our GDP. He understands that American jobs are being lost to illegal immigrants.

The main thing that I come away from this is, what gives me hope is that the guy gets it. We have a lot of problems, and he knows what they are. He's identified them. He spent 20 minutes listing them. I can't even get Obama to say the words "radical Islamic terrorism."

Shauuna in Utah

I went into it absolutely hating him. I've hated him for years. But his children impressed me so much that I'm hopeful that his love for his children will cause him to live up to the things he's promising. I think that he's promising that he'll take over the financial and pretty much leave the rest to Pence. That's what I'm thinking. He'll negotiate the deals with other countries so that we have a better balance.

I watched the whole thing. I'm a glutton for punishment.

Josh in Florida

Really, at heart, I couldn't vote for Hillary Clinton. So I have to do my citizen duty and vote. But what really stuck out to me was when he started speaking about the evangelical votes and when he said he didn't even know if he deserved it. To me, that sounded like he was trying to humble himself, for the first time really, and that's what really stuck out to me.

And my opinion is, the borders: Hillary wants them open; he wants them closed. That alone should be the deciding factor of this election because these people are trying to come in here and change the culture of America. Not even just our constitutional rights and all of that, the culture of America. So, yes, I am voting for Donald Trump.

Robin in Florida

I went into the speech with a little bit of anxiety because you've been hearing the snippets and seeing the snippets of him on TV: "I'm wealthy." "I build." "I did." "I did."

What I saw last night -- and mind you, the first time I've watched an entire acceptance speech; I've never watched the entire thing -- last night, I heard you, the citizen. This is about the people of America. I'm going to come get your back. I'm going to come watch over you. I'm going to stand between you and whatever's coming at us. It was all about us the citizens and someone coming back for us.

The other thing I've said I've seen and was reiterated last night is his family. And his family really surrounds him. And that is a building block that we are really missing now in this day.

Steve in Georgia

So I've now been watching this stuff for 25 years. And I'll tell you what, it never ceases to amaze me. What I saw last night was what I saw when Obama was giving his speeches, when Obama was running. When Obama stood behind the Greek pillars and accepted the mantel of leadership from the country, he was going to solve all of their problems. He was going to walk across water. And the people believed it because he told them what they wanted to hear. And those of us on the right, we watched this. And we watched this, and we were enamored with the ignorance of the American people. We watched this, and we were like, "How can these people believe this? How could they fall for this?"

And now, all of the people who commented on Obama are doing the same thing for Trump. He's promising that he's going to solve their problems. Yeah, it's nice to have somebody to stand up and speak what a lot of us believe to be truths. That's always great to hear, especially when political correctness has been working at removing free speech from society for the last 20 years. It's nice to hear that. It's refreshing.

However, where he loses me, do I believe that he'll do it? No, I'm not going to be one of the people in the country who is chasing a shiny object. I believe that, as you and many of your listeners do, that this country is about done. The experiment is about over. And I also believe that we had one more shot to solve the problem, and I think that we've missed it.

When anyone stands up and tells us that we have all these problems and he is the only one who can solve these problems, that's a problem. That's a problem in and of itself. And people need to wake up to that.

And, unfortunately, I've almost lost faith that the American people will wake up to it. Those of us who listen to your show, those of us who have been following this, those of us who take and have taken an objective view of politics and of the nature of what our country has become, sheer disappointment. Sheer disappointment.

Mark in Ohio

I'm a teacher in Manso, Ohio, and I live in a very economically depressed area. We used to have the GM staffing plant here, and it's gone. But, anyway, I had to defend myself quite a bit against other teachers who are Democratic supporters. And being a Republican, I had to keep coming up, what is the basis of my argument? And I kept thinking about Trump being a businessman who understands corporate taxes. And I kept hearing him say that he's going to bring back manufacturing to America. And I think that's one of the biggest areas that has concern for me, is bringing jobs to America. And giving people jobs. When he talks about understanding corporate taxes and taxes in general, I believe that's because he's a businessman. So, yes, it does strengthen my position among colleagues and friends.

Nicole in Massachusetts

I'm so pleased to speak to you. And before I start, I just want to say one thing: You've had such a profound impact in my life that I actually met my husband and happily married because of Restoring Love. I met him at Highpoint Church. So I just wanted to let you know that you had that impact on my life. And thank you so much.

So as a millennial in Massachusetts, my BS-ometer was just blowing up last night, and I believe that this man has no integrity at all, and he has proven that to me over and over and over again, throughout his campaign.

I think what the speech and what all of the speeches preceding his speech attempted to do was to make him that good guy --- and he has no integrity. So I think people really want to believe that he's a good guy, and as my mom has pointed out to me repeatedly, his family is his biggest asset because they speak so highly. And people so desperately want to cling to the idea that Donald Trump might be a good man.

I don't think we can trust anything he said last night. It was a complete overreach, to the point where he was even hitting Democratic talking points. And I understand that, you know, unity was the theme. So in that regard, his speech made sense. But he really -- I mean, it was just -- it was lies. And to me, it was so apparent, he's not a good man, he's not going to honor his word. And if we're going to fall for the, "Oh, well, his children say he's wonderful," listen, criminals are really good to their own family. So why would we think that just because he's good to his family, he won't screw us in the long run?

Ashley in Georgia

I went in feeling lost, and I came out feeling lost. I feel like he's got some really good speechwriters around him, and he's going to turn into a really good politician.

I feel like my only hope is that he'll be smart enough to put really smart people around him so he doesn't totally screw up the country if he gets in. I don't believe anything he said because of his actions in the past. Because the history of this man doing what he's done his whole entire life, why would this be any different? I don't think he will be any different. I think he will be who he is, even though he says something different, even though he said something different last night. Our words mean nothing if there's no action to support what we say.

When your actions over the years have proven you to be one way and then all of a sudden you start saying something else, I don't believe you, until your actions start following suit. In life, you can say what you want to me. You can say all the right things to me, but when you've got a history, you condition me not to believe you. I've been conditioned not to believe him because of his actions. And I think that's a big thing.

Mary in Ohio

I went into the speech last night undecided because I am definitely not a Hillary supporter, but I came out frightened because he was whipping those people into a frenzy. He was spouting and screaming nationalism, and it's what I imagined the German people were hearing in the late '20s and early '30s. I think it was the position of his head, which may sound kind of strange, but when he was waiting for a reaction, his chin went up, he was looking down. I think he looked like any dictator that I have ever seen speak, and it frightened me.

Vince in Tennessee

Going in, I did not have any expectation of voting for Donald Trump. I was actually going to be proud to, for the first time in my life, sit home and not vote because I couldn't put my name on this and go before God.

Living in Tennessee, I know how Tennessee is going to go anyways. However, shy of speaking of the Constitution, return to constitutional values, I didn't hear that last night, so I didn't have any change in my heart for Trump. The thing that did make an impact on me was when Ted Cruz said, "Please, don't stay at home." And he said, "I tell you, I'm not voting for Hillary." He didn't come out and say he's voting for Donald, but the fact that he said, "Don't stay home," that spoke to me a little bit more. And now I'm having to reenter into prayer about, "What do I do now?"

Pat in Mississippi

Well, me and my husband live in rural Mississippi. My husband stayed up. He gets up at 4:30 in the morning. He stayed up to listen to this speech. We were both big Cruz supporters. We're voting for Trump. It's a no-brainer.

Number one, the wall. The safety of our country. Number two, I work in the schools. I see the kids have no motivation because the parents either live off the government or have two low-paying jobs. They have to live in a family where the people are working and have something to look forward to. The third thing is, I believe he's going to get the right people for the job to fix this government mess. It is so bad. There are so many good people out here in this country that are well educated and can fix stuff.

Featured Image: Screenshot from The Glenn Beck Program, July 22, 2016.

TOP 5 takeaways from JD Vance's 'Face the Nation' interview

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

After an eventful first week in office, JD Vance wrapped the week up with a bang of an interview on "Face the Nation."

Last weekend, Vice President Vance joined "Face the Nation" host Margaret Brennan, who drilled Vance on everything from the economy to immigration. Vance clapped back with polite yet cutting responses, and he defended Trump against some of her more accusatory queries.

If there was any lingering doubt that JD Vance wasn't vice presidential (or presidential) material, they have just been blown away. Here are the major takeaways from his electricinterview on Sunday:

1. J.D. Vance defends Trump's cabinet picks

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Brennan opened the interview with a barrage of questions that brought up concerns surrounding some of Trump's cabinet picks, specifically Pete Hegseth and Tulsi Gabbard.

Brennan began by questioning how effective Pete Hegseth could be as Secretary of Defence, given that he was confirmed with a tie in the Senate that VP Vance broke. Vance responded with a quick breakdown of all of the issues the military is currently facing. Vance argued that Hegseth's unpopularity in the Senate results from his being a disruptor.

Brennan also attacked Tulsi Gabbard, calling her unfit for the title of "Director of National Intelligence." Vance defended Gabbard, citing her formidable resume and strong character. Vance also discussed the corruption of our intelligence services, which out-of-control bureaucrats have weaponized against the interests of the American people. He expressed his belief that Gabbard would be the right person to reign in the corruption and return the National Intelligence Service to its intended purpose.

2. J.D. Vance explains how Trump's economic policies will lower consumer prices

Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

Brennan pushed Vance on the economy, specifically questioning when prices for consumer goods would begin to fall. Vance explained that within the plethora of executive orders issued by Trump during his first week in office, many were aimed at bringing more jobs back into America, which will raise wages and lower prices. Other orders will boost energy production, which will reduce energy costs and decrease the costs of goods.

3. J.D. Vance sheds light on needed FEMA reforms

ROBYN BECK / Staff | Getty Images

Brennan drilled Vance on President Trump's proposed FEMA reforms, specifically regarding Trump's suggestion to send states a percentage of federal disaster relief funds so that they can quickly distribute aid rather than wait on federal action. While Brennen argued that FEMA has specialists and resources that states would not have access to, leaving people without aid, Vance argued that recent disasters, like Hurricane Helene, have proven that FEMA's current bureaucratic red tape deprived Americans of immediate aid when they needed it most.

4. J.D. Vance defends Trump's mass deportations

PIERRE-PHILIPPE MARCOU / Contributor | Getty Images

Vance defended Trump's decision to allow ICE to conduct raids into churches and schools against Brennen's criticisms, arguing that law enforcement should remove a dangerous criminal from a school or church, regardless of their immigration status. He also advocated for Trump's proposed changes to birthright citizenship to prevent illegal immigrants from abusing the constitutional amendment by having "anchor babies" on U.S. soil.

Vance also took a hard stance supporting Trump suspension of admitting Afghan refugees. Brennan argued that Afghan refugees were going through a thorough vetting process and were now being abandoned by the U.S. However, Vance cited the foiled terrorist attack in Oklahoma City during Trump's 2024 campaign that was orchestrated by an Afghan refugee, who was allegedly vetted by federal agents. The vetting process is clearly flawed, and it was a prudent decision to halt the admission of these refugees until further notice.

5. J.D. Vance insists that Trump will still reign in Big Tech

PIERRE-PHILIPPE MARCOU / Contributor | Getty Images

To wrap up the interview, Brennan questioned the Trump administration's stance on Big Tech given the attendance of the industry's biggest names at Trump's inauguration, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Apple CEO Tim Cook, and TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew. Vance assured Brennan that Trump is still resolved to curb the power and influence of Big Tech.

Top THREE reasons the U.S. NEEDS Greenland

EMIL STACH / Contributor | Getty Images

Are Trump's repeated promises to claim Greenland for the U.S. just belligerent imperialism or a deft move to secure the future of America?

During his patriotic inaugural address, President Trump reiterated his campaign promise to expand American territories, including securing U.S. control over Greenland. This is not a new idea despite what the mainstream media may claim.

The idea of buying Greenland was originally introduced by progressive hero Woodrow Wilson in 1917 as an attempt to secure the homeland as America was gearing up to enter the First World War. The second attempt came after World War II when President Truman tried to buy the island from Denmark in another attempt to shore up national security, this time against the Soviets. Since then, Trump floated the idea in 2019, which was met with much the same ridicule as now.

The truth is that the acquisition of Greenland represents far more than just an outlet for repressed imperialist desires. It would be one of America's best investments in a long time, which is why we've been eyeballing it for so long. Here are three reasons the U.S. needs Greenland:

Strategic Military Position

THOMAS TRAASDAHL / Contributor | Getty Images

For the majority of the 20th century, Europe was the region from which a foreign attack on American soil could be launched: the Germans for the first half of the century, and the Russians for the second half. On both occasions, Greenland stood between our foreign enemies and the United States.

After the World War II, America was the official military defender of Greenland, per an agreement with Denmark. Under this agreement, the U.S. built Pituffik Air Force Base, a remote base 750 miles north of the Arctic Circle. Due to its location, approximately halfway between D.C. and Moscow, the Pentagon still views Pituffik as a vital component of America's nuclear defense.

The U.S. also built a secret base within the ice cap known as Camp Century. Camp Century was part scientific outpost, part nuclear-tipped ballistic missile silo built in the ice to withstand a direct atomic strike. The nearly two miles of icy tunnels were powered by a nuclear reactor and were designed to survive a nuclear first strike, and return fire. Although abandoned in 1967, Camp Century still symbolizes the strategic importance of Greenland for U.S. security.

Untapped Resources

OLIVIER MORIN / Contributor | Getty Images

While Greenland's population is a mere 56,000, the island has a total landmass nearly three times the size of Texas. According to a 2009 geological assessment, a whopping 30 percent of the Earth's undiscovered natural gas, and 13 percent of its undiscovered oil is locked away beneath Greenland's icy ground. There are also untapped deposits of valuable rare earth metals including copper, graphite, and lithium.

Neither Greenland nor Denmark have any real plans to tap into this immense wealth trapped beneath the ice, but it could prove crucial for ending the West's dependency on China. China has the global market cornered on rare earth minerals- including America. We acquire 72 percent of our rare earth mineral imports from China, making us entirely dependent on them for the manufacturing of many essential goods. Tapping Greenland's natural resources would help free America, and the West, from China's yolk.

Polar Silk Road

mark peterson / Contributor | Getty Images

In 2018 China launched an ambitious project that aimed to cut the travel time of cargo vessels between its ports and European markets in half. China, in collaboration with Russia, plans on developing new shipping routes through the Arctic Ocean. This bold new strategy, dubbed the "Polar Silk Road," has been made possible thanks to new tech, including a fleet of Russian, nuclear-powered icebreakers, the latest of which is capable of breaking through nearly 10 feet of ice.

With clear waterways from eastern China and Northern Europe, it won't be long before the first cargo ships brave the frigid sea and China looks to the next leg of the journey: the Northwest Passage. The Northwest Passage is the area of sea between Canada and the North Pole that would be an optimal shipping route between America's East Coast and Asia if it wasn't frozen over most of the year. But with new technology, we may be able to overcome the challenges of the ice and open the passage to commercial traffic, and Greenland is positioned directly on the passage's easternmost mouth.

Greenland would quickly become a key location along the Northwestern Passage, acting as a sentinel of the east, with the ability to control traffic through the trade route. If China or Russia were to take control of Greenland, they would dominate the Northwestern Passage, along with the rest of the new northern trade routes.

Is Romania squashing its own 'Trump' candidate?

DANIEL MIHAILESCU / Contributor | Getty Images

This week the streets of Bucharest, the capital of Romania, erupted in protest after the Constitutional Courts annulled the recent first round of the presidential election after the "far-right" candidate won.

The government is lying to you. If you have been listening to Glenn for a long time you already know that, and you also know that if you try to call attention to the lies you get labeled a conspiracy theorist or "far-right." This is not only true in America but across the world. Politicians cheat, steal, and grab power, then lie about all of it. This is the root of countless issues across every government on the planet, and recently Romania has become the latest example of this unfortunate phenomenon.

But what is really happening in Romania? Was this an actual attempt to stamp out someone who would shed light on lies and corruption? Or did the Romanian government put a stop to a genuine bad actor?

The Election

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

On December 6th, 2024, the Romanian Constitutional Court canceled the second round of the presidential election amid claims of Russian interference. The second round of the election would have seen right-wing candidate, Calin Georgescu face off against pro-European centrist Elena Lasconi.

The trouble surrounds Georgescu, who stands accused of using Russian aid to run an unprecedented social media campaign that helped him win an election pollsters claimed he stood no chance of winning. Georgescu's rapid rise in popularity on social media does raise some eyebrows, and to add to the suspicion he declared he had zero campaign spending. On the other hand, Georgescu's supporters claim that his quick rise to stardom and underdog victory is due to the growing resentment for the ever-out-of-touch political elite.

Georgescu's Platform

Andrei Pungovschi / Stringer | Getty Images

Georgescu rose to prominence on a platform many of his detractors have labeled "far-right," "pro-Russian," and "populist" (sound familiar?). His positions include supporting Romanian farmers, increasing Romanian self-reliance, and increasing local energy production. Georgescu has been lauded for his message of hope and vision for the future and his dedication to truth, freedom, and sovereignty.

Georgescu is also a vocal Christian and a supporter of the Romanian Orthodox Church. He has questioned the climate change and COVID-19 narrative as well as NATO and the war in Ukraine, which is how he earned his "Pro-Russian" monicker. Georgescu promised to respect and honor its obligations to the EU and NATO, but only to the extent that they respect Romania and its interests.

What Happens Next?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

After Georgescu's unexpected victory, the Romanian Constitutional Courts annulled the election's first round and scheduled it to restart on May 4th. As of now, it is unclear whether Georgescu will be allowed to participate in the new election. This act by the Constitutional Courts triggered mass protests in the capital, Bucharest, and has caused many Romainians to question the state of democracy within their country.

Many of the protesters are calling what happened a coup and are demanding the election be allowed to continue to the second round. They are also calling for the resignation of current President Klaus Iohannis, who has maintained power thanks to the incomplete elections. Georgescu has officially challenged the court's decision and even made a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights, but it is unclear if his appeal will make any difference.

The tides have turned — and now the very same banks that were pushing heavy-handed environmental, social, governance rules are running away from them.

In a significant victory, a federal judge in Texas has ruled that employers and asset managers cannot use environmental, social, and governance factors in employee retirement accounts. If this ruling holds up — which is likely, given the conservative composition of the appellate court — it will dramatically shift the balance of power between corporations and their employees.

This decision represents one of the most substantial blows to the ESG agenda to date. Companies that have been steering employees into ESG-focused investments, which prioritize progressive values over financial returns, now face legal repercussions. Continuing such practices would directly violate federal law. The ruling forces companies to re-evaluate their commitment to ESG initiatives, and many may withdraw from these funds before the case even reaches the appellate court.

Watching these corporations squirm as they try to backtrack and avoid legal repercussions is ever so satisfying.

The impact of this ruling could very well be the beginning of the end for the ESG movement as it’s been pushed by elites.

In even better news, BlackRock, a major player in the ESG movement, has officially left the United Nations’ International Association of Asset Managers. This is a direct rebuke of the global push for ESG initiatives and a major sign that the tide is turning. In contrast to the Glasgow Net Zero Conference in which the Global Financial Alliance for Net Zero — an organization championed by global elites — was pushing for ESG to be a central focus, BlackRock’s departure from the group signals that even those who were at the forefront of this movement are starting to distance themselves.

But it doesn't stop there. Every major U.S. bank has now announced that they too are leaving the U.N.’s Association of Net Zero ESG Bankers, another key part of the Glasgow Financial Alliance. For years, we’ve been warning that ESG in banking was one of the primary ways elites like Biden, the Davos crowd, and others were planning to reset the world’s economy.

The tides have turned — and now those very same banks are running away from ESG, a powerful signal of things to come. They know they’re on the losing side, and they’re scared that a new administration will come down hard on them for their involvement in these globalist initiatives.

In another win, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau unveiled a shocking new rule that, if it survives, would prohibit many financial institutions from de-banking customers based on their political or religious views, or even certain types of speech. While the rule is not as comprehensive as we need it to be, it’s a step in the right direction — and it includes concerns raised by our allies about the dangers of ESG. The Trump administration has promised to come down even harder on the banks with tougher rules, and this is a very good start.

Watching these corporations squirm as they try to backtrack and avoid legal repercussions is ever so satisfying. Some are running for cover while others are desperately trying to ingratiate themselves with the powers that be. It’s clear that the backbone of these companies is made of rubber, not steel. They don’t really believe in the ESG values they preach — they’re just playing the game to get in bed with the political elites.

Now that Trump is back in town, these corporations are showing their true colors. They never cared about their customers or the values they forced upon them. It was always about the power they could acquire through catering to those in power at the time.

No company should be afraid of the president of the United States. But they’re not afraid of Donald Trump. They’re afraid of the return of the rule of law. They know that fascistic public-private partnerships between the government and corporations are on the way out. That’s a victory for freedom and a victory for the American people.

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