‘I Am Jane Doe’ Documentary Exposes How Sites Like 'Backpage' Help Child Sex Traffickers

Can you imagine seeing your missing daughter in a prostitution ad? Parents shared their real-life nightmares in the new documentary “I Am Jane Doe,” which takes a sobering look at the child sex trafficking industry facilitated by websites like Backpage.com.

“It’s horrifying, and it’s happening, and people are making millions of dollars on it,” Glenn said on radio Monday while introducing director Mary Mazzio.

She talked about her horrifying revelation that children were being enslaved in droves in the U.S. as well as what Backpage does to help sex traffickers find clients who will rape children by the hour. Backpage and other sites have been allowed to host ads selling children, getting away with it by filtering out terms like “Lolita” or “amber alert” before publishing the ads pimping out kids anyway.

“People call this human trafficking … that’s kind of a sanitized term,” Mazzio said. “What we’re talking about is serial child rape. These children are carted from motel room to motel room.”

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: There's some things that don't matter at all. Some things that matter a lot. But what matters most?

We're being sucked into things that, really, don't matter at all. We're being sucked into arguments about free speech and safe zones that, quite honestly, I'm sorry, if you're on a college campus, get over it. There are going to be some communists that you are talking to you. And there are going to be some Nazis that are talking to you, and they all have a right to say it. There are going to be some pro-global warming people and some anti-global warming people. You're on a college campus. Get over it. That's where you should be challenged on everything that you think. That's why there is tenure, so somebody can ask outrageous questions. We're not a society that was built on timidity. We have to be able to challenge each other.

So Hollywood, college campuses, communists, Nazis, the NFL, one, a right to stand. You have a right to take a knee. Because, quite honestly, that's a sideshow. Anybody else feel like you were in the Roman Colosseum this weekend? Real things are happening, that actually matter. And we're watching -- we're watching lions and Christians. What are we doing?

There is free speech. And there's an argument that -- it is the argument that has to be made that speech must be protected. And the only kind of speech that has to be protected is the speech that the majority doesn't like.

However, there are people that hide behind free speech. And they do real damage. Right now, in Congress, they are talking about the Communications Act and the Communications Decency Act of 1996. And there is -- there is something that came from The Village Voice, it's called the Backpage. And it is the literal auction platform for slavery today.

And people have been trying to shut this down for quite some time, and they have some really good attorneys.

This needs to be heard by you. There is a movie that is out, that just came out. It's on Netflix and i Tunes and Vimeo and Google Play, Amazon DVD. It is called I Am Jane Doe. Parents -- it's hard to watch. It's parents who sent their kids off to school one day, and they didn't come back. Kids that left home and didn't come back, until their parents found them being sold on the Backpage of the Village Voice. It's horrifying, and it's happening. And people are making millions of dollars on it.

A woman who didn't know anything about human trafficking just a few years ago is the producer and director of I Am Jane Doe. And she's with em now. Mary Mazzio. Hi, Mary, how are you?

MARY: Glenn, how are you this morning? Thank you for having me on.

GLENN: You're welcome. So explain to the audience exactly what's happening.

MARY: So this started, Glenn, when I read an article in the Boston Globe about Jane Doe number one, Jane Doe number two, and Jane Doe number three, age 13, 14, and 15 years old, that sued backpage.com and the Village Voice empire for -- for compensation for injuries they sustained by virtue of being bought and sold for commercial sex online. And people call this human trafficking and sex trafficking. And sex trafficking of minors. That's kind of a sanitized term, right?

What we're talking about is serial child rape, right?

These children are carted from motel room to motel room. They are with the admin of technology, right? They're schedule on the hour by the hour.

And I had not a clue that this was happening in numbers that would make your head spin in this country. I think, like most Americans, I assumed this was happening in developing countries, right? Where children are bought and sold for sex.

And when I read this article, I remember thinking, "What the hell?" This is ten minutes from where I live. Jane Doe one, two, and three. And they're represented, by the way, by Ropes & Gray, one of sort of the oldest white-shoe law firms in the country. And, oh, by the way, how did Ropes & Gray get the case? Like, how did they lose their motion, right? How did they lose this lawsuit?

That made no sense to me. And I'm a recovering lawyer, which is like highly irritating to many people, by the way. But I'm really thinking at the time -- I read the decision, and I remember thinking, "How is it legal in this country for websites like Backpage -- and there are many others, by the way, to host ads selling children? How is that legal? And yet, it is.

GLENN: Okay. So now -- so people understand, this is some -- you know, this comes from The Village Voice. And a lot of people on the left were protecting The Village Voice. And they were like, "No. There's no way they understand. There's no way this is happening." Because to a lot of people on the left, The Village Voice is, you know, the voice of a generation, and a hero outlet to many.

MARY: Oh, yeah. Fighting -- fighting truth to power, right? I mean, exposing corruption. Exposing wrongdoing.

And yet -- and listen, I'm a liberal, right? I swing very left. And it pains me, right? That Backpage and the Village Voice -- and we'll talk about Google in a minute. But the dirty little secret to all the alternative weeklies was that their editorial was supported by the sex ad. And, listen, back in the '70s, it was free love, free sex, right? Whatever goes. And I think the term -- the lexicon around human trafficking, nobody really started talking about it until ten years ago, 12 years ago. What is it? And I think that really exposed -- what you said before, this is -- particularly as it relates to children, modern day slavery. And the numbers are escalating with technology online. And what I mean by that is that the problem is getting worse, rather than better. There's an estimate of around 15 percent of all homeless and runaway children, will be victimized. And when you think about the numbers, there's anywhere between 1.6 and 2.5 million children on the street at any one time.

Fifteen percent of those children -- oh, my God, we're not talking about a kid here or there that shows up at the Port Authority. We are talking about conservatively, hundreds of thousands of children. And, by the way, I received this report from the University of Louisville. And they said, "Mary, you know, we understand that 15 percent is sort of the estimate. It's in the shadows. Nobody quite knows. But make no mistake, we -- we did a study of children in Kentucky and Indiana, we have concluded that 40 percent of homeless and runaway children were victimized by child sex trafficking. Forty percent. So this is a problem that is escalating in size and scale. And it sits along the opioid epidemic. And that is something that nobody is talking about. Because those children are the most vulnerable.

GLENN: Okay. Mary, I'm going to run out of time. So I would like to -- because I want to get -- I want to build this in layers because there's a lot of information that people need to absorb.

First, I want you to watch the video. It's free. It's everywhere. It's I Am Jane Doe. It is a really well-produced documentary. And I warn you, when you start talking about freedom of speech, you will -- you will -- if you're a Libertarian, start to say, "Well, wait a minute. Hang on just a second. Do they have a right -- do they have a responsibility to know exactly what's happening on the other side, if somebody is just putting in a classified ad?" But that's not what's happening here. You know, if somebody wants to post something on Facebook -- Facebook isn't responsible for what everybody says online. They can't be. It will put them out of business.

Nobody can do that. But that's not what's happening. Can you quickly, Mary, explain what the Backpage is doing.

MARY: Yeah, and so this is really interesting. Because a Senate investigation sprang up, which provided all kinds of evidence that -- for example, a pimp or a trafficker might post an ad for a child and would use terms that would signal a child: New in town, fresh off the boat, schoolgirl.

These are indicia, of a child, right? And Backpage developed filters, according to the congressional report, that would automatically scrub the term "Lolita" or "schoolgirl," right? Or Amber Alert, and yet the ad would then be posted.

So there was some conscious decision to mask indicia of a child. And I think that is what is so troubling about the Wild West online is that Backpage and those that have supported Backpage -- which, by the way, includes Google and others that are desperate to keep this Wild West culture online have said, even if you're a website that encourages illegality, you still bear no responsibility for the harm that happens, including the sale of children.

STU: Mary, just to clarify, were you saying that they put the term Amber Alert in the ads?

MARY: Some traffickers apparently put the term "Amber Alert," because it was a term that Congress discovered that was filtered out automatically by Backpage.

STU: That is absolutely unbelievable.

MARY: I kid you not. I kid you not. There's a new child to the cause, and there's an effort in Congress right now to really close the loophole, right? If you're a bad actor and you're encouraging this activity, you ought to bear some responsibility. Right? There should be a financial incentive for you to clean up your act.

And one of the mothers, her child, she lost her child at Christmas time to a Backpage buyer. Her daughter was 16 years old. What did the ad say? Fresh. New in town.

GLENN: I learned this from working with Operation Underground Railroad, that there are, you know, low miles. There are terms.

MARY: Precisely.

GLENN: There are terms that people who are buying children clearly understand. And for Backpage to be censoring those and then not turning those people into police is really quite reprehensible and frightening.

I want you to -- here's what I want you to do: Mary, would you be willing to come back later this week? Because I want to talk to you about the Google connection.

MARY: Yes, of course.

GLENN: Because Mary is -- you know, correct me if I'm wrong, Mary, but you and I don't agree on much, I would imagine.

(laughter)

MARY: Exactly. You could probably count it on one hand, Glenn.

GLENN: Yes. So we don't agree on much. However, we do agree on this. And what she's going through now, what Google appears to be doing to her, they are making her look like me. They're making her -- you know, treating her --

STU: This is terrible, Mary. I'm so sorry for you.

GLENN: Yeah, no. They're treating her like they would treat me. So something is really wrong. I get it when they're treating me that way. But when they're treating one of their own, there's something really wrong. And I want her to explain that.

But the first thing I want you to do is, please today watch I Am Jane Doe and bring yourself up to speed on this. Because there's something going through Congress that needs to happen. Later this week, I hope to have Mike Lee on to talk -- have you talked to Mike Lee about this at all, Mary?

MARY: No -- no, I have not.

GLENN: Okay. So I would like to get Mike involved in this. Because I trust Mike as a real strict constitutionalist, but he's also a deeply moral man. And so we'll -- you know, we'll not excuse -- will not excuse the -- the horrors done to people over -- you know, for rights, if you will.

MARY: Right. Exactly. And he's a First Amendment specialist. And I think both he and I fundamentally agree, this is about conduct online. It has nothing to do with speech.

GLENN: Nothing to do with speech. Okay. Mary, thank you so much. I appreciate it.

The name of the movie is I am Jane Doe. We'll talk again, Mary. Thanks.

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.

Could China OWN our National Parks?

Jonathan Newton / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

Here’s what’s really happening.

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

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

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

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

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

Failed management

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

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

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

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

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

Biden’s federal land-grab

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

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

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

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

Land as collateral

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

What happens if America defaults on its debt?

David McNew / Stringer | Getty Images

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

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

The American way

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.