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

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

This Doctor Wants to Change Health Care to Give People Quality Over Quantity

October 24, 2017
Staff

WRITER

Health care is a hot-button issue because it directly affects people’s lives. But is there a better approach than debating which government health care system is the least burdensome on Americans?

Dr. Ryan Neuhofel opened NeuCare in 2011, a “direct primary care” facility that uses a subscription-based model instead of health insurance. Patients can sign up and pay a flat monthly fee for comprehensive health services.

This model lets the patient be the true customer instead of an insurance company or the government.

“Whenever you enter into these direct relationships, it changes the way that the doctor thinks about things, it changes the way the patient does, and it inherently provides transparency,” Neuhofel said.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: So if you're like the average American, you are having problems paying for your health insurance. You are having problems keeping your doctor. You don't know what to do. Nobody in Washington is making any sense. It doesn't seem like anybody is doing anything at all.

What do you do? Well, if you're a doctor, there are things that you can do. And I want to introduce you to a guy who I read about a couple weeks ago. Dr. Ryan Neuhofel. Am I saying your name right, Dr. Neuhofel?

RYAN: That's correct, Glenn.

GLENN: So tell us what you're doing, because you've decided that you've had enough of this. And you're in, if I'm not mistaken, Lawrence Kansas.

RYAN: Right.

GLENN: And you knew that people weren't being served. And you were no longer even a doctor, you were more of a paper pusher. So what did you do?

RYAN: Well, I started a practice about six years. So I guess you could say I got fed up a long time ago, even when I was in medical school. And so I operate in a pretty unique model of practice that is growing around the country, called Direct Primary Care. And basically what that is, is it allows patients to have a direct and simple relationship with me, their primary care doctor. It's organized around a membership fee, much like Netflix or a gym. And we're just able to serve people's needs in an innovative way and not be distracted by all the bullcrap that comes along by a normal system.

GLENN: So you're not -- you don't take insurance.

RYAN: No.

GLENN: And so how much is the monthly fee?

RYAN: So on average, my monthly fee for all of my patients combined is about $43 per member, per month. So some people pay a little more. Some people a little less. Families get a discount. And doctors around the country are doing this. And it's not just a few of us rogue people anymore. There's hundreds and maybe close to a thousand primary care physicians doing this model or something very similar to it.

GLENN: I will tell you that I have -- you know, I still try to purchase the best health insurance that money can buy for my employees and for myself for catastrophic. But I -- this is the system that I use. I have a doctor, and I pay him a -- you know, a retainer, I guess. And I can go see him when I want to go see him.

And I'm -- I'm glad that this is starting to come around, because the one thing that is good about this, is when you are paying for yourself, the doctor doesn't just say, oh, go here to get this done. You know, he -- he knows which tests cost the most money where, and where you can get them inexpensive. You know, an inexpensive run of that test.

Do you provide that as well?

RYAN: Yeah, absolutely. I think it changes the whole dynamic. If you really look at it, although doctors are really caring people. And trying to serve people and provide them great care. Ultimately, if you're using insurance, the insurance company or the government, if you're in a program like that, is the real customer. So the patient, at that point is kind of a building vessel of sorts. And whenever you enter into these direct relationships, it changes the way that the doctor thinks about things. It changes the way the patient does. It inherently provides transparency. So I'm working for my patients now, as opposed to a third party.

GLENN: So explain that to the average person. Because I think the average person knows this. When you hear your doctor say, are you insured? Who is your insurance provider?

What they're asking you -- and correct me if I'm wrong, what they're asking you is, I know the insurance providers, and some of them accept some things. Some don't accept others. And so I just need to navigate and how to write, instead of now -- you know, you don't have insurance. If you don't have insurance, your doctor says, okay. So here are the options. And it's -- it's never just, you know, here's a 3,000-dollar test.

RYAN: Yeah, well, I think the thing that's most difficult for people is actually the language. So people across the political spectrum use terminology like health insurance and health care. And they don't even really make a distinction between what those two things mean.

So you hear a lot of politicians talk, they'll say, you know, we're giving you health care. Well, they're kind of giving you an insurance product that gives you a network of doctors. But that gets all very confusing.

So what we're doing is we're stripping away all of that stuff. And much like if someone were purchasing food or something else in their life, you know, they -- I am serving my customers, my patients, and I have to be fully transparent in that. So we're very aware of what stuff costs, whereas if I was billing an insurance company, it's kind of just backwards stuff. And there's a bunch of complicated contracts. So, yeah, it's a totally different way to approach health care.

GLENN: So this is good if you're the run-of-the-mill, you know, I've got the sniffles. I've got the cold. Even a broken arm. Et cetera, et cetera. But what happens to your patients when you can't deal with it. They've got to go to a specialist, and it's going to be expensive.

RYAN: Well, you know, I think one of the big downsides of the system that we have, is it's devalued primary care to such a degree that most people don't really recognize the family physician, like myself, can take care of a lot of really complicated stuff.

So I do take care of a very broad spectrum of stuff. And I think in the normal system because doctors are so rushed and we don't get to spend time with our patients, we're paid on a volume basis. That we often do end up ordering stuff and referring people to specialists, when we could have taken care of it ourselves. But, you know, we're trying to get to the next patient. So I think that's the first thing to recognize, is that primary care get done correctly and valued high enough, that we could provide more service.

But really, what you're getting to, is there is a point, where financially insurance starts to make sense. What I think we're challenging is doing most people's health care across the spectrum of care, to a third party doesn't make a lot of sense. So, yeah, there is a point where insurance makes sense. But is that $100? Is that $1,000? Is that at $10,000? It kind of depends on the person.

STU: Talking to Dr. Ryan Neuhofel. Doctor, you have -- this is a great idea. And I think everyone looks at this and says, wow, this would be a perfect way to knock out 90 percent of the stuff that could happen as far as health care goes. It seems to me though that the current system would really discourage this. You're going to get fined if you don't have insurance and you decide to go this way. I mean, how are you dealing with that? And is this a problem with a lot of the patients that you have?

RYAN: Yeah. I'm not advocating that people not have insurance. In fact, I do the opposite. I think insurance makes sense for certain things. A great analogy, if we tried to use car insurance to cover everything related to our car --

GLENN: Oil changes.

RYAN: -- if we tried to use it to pay for our gas, oil changes, tire rotations, you know, shampooing our carpets in our car, that wouldn't make a lot of sense. Now, if our car gets totaled and it costs $20,000 to get replaced, that tradeoff with insurance makes sense. And the same thing with homeowner's insurance.

So, yeah, there needs to be a safety net and insurance policy of some type. Whether that's government-based, private-based, to where that makes sense.

Right now, in the current system, because of all of the mandates, they're basically -- you know, the ACA and many things before it are forcing people to pay a third party. A financial institution, which we call it an insurance company, to kind of manage all their money for them. And I think clearly that's led to many of the ills in our current health care system.

STU: Because it's more than just not having insurance at all. It's all the restrictions they put on higher deductible plans. There's so many things that must be covered by these insurance policies. I mean, if you could combine what you're doing, a monthly fee, you can go when you need to go, with a high deductible plan, for only the worst catastrophic stuff, that is a great formula for a family. But it's really discouraged right now.

RYAN: Well, yeah, you can get -- in fact -- and I'm sure your audience will tell you this. They had been forced into a high deductible. So a lot of the patients we're serving, you know, end up getting a bronze plan, or their employer switches them to a plan with a high deductible, they really start seeing the value and transparency and up front prices. And, you know, not overpaying for things.

So, yes, in a sense, I think we should move to kind of a more true catastrophic system. And I think that could be done in a lot of ways.

But, you know, our entire health care system is built upon kind of an understanding of what health care was looking like in 1930, through 1970. And, you know, health care is a much more integral part of our lives now. People have chronic diseases they live with their entire lives with. And 1960, whenever we developed Medicare and Medicaid and even going back further, you know, health care really couldn't do a whole lot. It could kind of do surgery to save you, but I think health care right now looks so much different. We're trying to fit a round peg in a square hole at this point.

GLENN: So neucare.net. NU -- I'm sorry. N-E-Ucare.net is the address if you would like to find out more.

How does somebody find somebody in your local area like you? What do you even look for?

RYAN: Yeah. Actually, there's a really great resource now online. The best one that I direct people to is called DPCfrontier.com. And there's a mapper on that website. So if you click FlashMapper, there's about a thousand doctors around the country, six to 800 practices, who are operating at a very similar model to mine. They all have their own kind of flavor of it. But if you're looking for a doctor in your area, that's by far the best resource to look for. Or you can Google -- Google if you Google direct primary care in your city, you'll probably stumble upon somebody.

GLENN: Great. Dr. Ryan Neuhofel. Thank you so much. I appreciate it. Good work. God bless.

(music)

STU: So Dr. Ryan Neuhofel is at Neucare. N-E-U-C-A-R-E on Twitter. And Neucare.net is his website. But, yeah, DPC Frontier is a cool site. I've never been to this before. Direct Primary Care. DPC Frontier. And they have a map of all of the doctors that do this type of thing. And there's a lot of them. Worth checking out.

GLENN: I have to tell you, it's a different kind of health care.

STU: You do this?

GLENN: I do. I do.

STU: That's really cool.

GLENN: Because I -- the doctor is allowed to spend more time with you. The doctor gets to know you better. Because he's not -- like he said, he's not rushing through things. He doesn't have all the paperwork to do. He doesn't have to worry about that. So we'll get a call from our doctor. We'll call him up and say, hey, this is going on with the family. Blah, blah. And then he'll call. He'll treat. And then, you know, he'll call -- you know, 8 o'clock on a -- you know, on a Friday night, and go, hey, I'm just thinking about Raphe. How is he feeling? What's going on?

And so it's like that old style medicine.

STU: You don't to have hang out with him, do you? You don't have to go to his Christmas parties or anything like that?

GLENN: No, you don't have to. No, you don't have to.

STU: Just wanted to make sure. I've got enough relationships.

GLENN: I do know that. I do know that. But it's nice to be able to have a doctor who has the time to actually get to know the family.

A Sharia enclave is quietly taking root in America. It's time to wake up.

NOVA SAFO / Staff | Getty Images

Sharia-based projects like the Meadow in Texas show how political Islam grows quietly, counting on Americans to stay silent while an incompatible legal system takes root.

Apolitical system completely incompatible with the Constitution is gaining ground in the United States, and we are pretending it is not happening.

Sharia — the legal and political framework of Islam — is being woven into developments, institutions, and neighborhoods, including a massive project in Texas. And the consequences will be enormous if we continue to look the other way.

This is the contradiction at the heart of political Islam: It claims universal authority while insisting its harshest rules will never be enforced here. That promise does not stand up to scrutiny. It never has.

Before we can have an honest debate, we’d better understand what Sharia represents. Sharia is not simply a set of religious rules about prayer or diet. It is a comprehensive legal and political structure that governs marriage, finance, criminal penalties, and civic life. It is a parallel system that claims supremacy wherever it takes hold.

This is where the distinction matters. Many Muslims in America want nothing to do with Sharia governance. They came here precisely because they lived under it. But political Islam — the movement that seeks to implement Sharia as law — is not the same as personal religious belief.

It is a political ideology with global ambitions, much like communism. Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently warned that Islamist movements do not seek peaceful coexistence with the West. They seek dominance. History backs him up.

How Sharia arrives

Political Islam does not begin with dramatic declarations. It starts quietly, through enclaves that operate by their own rules. That is why the development once called EPIC City — now rebranded as the Meadow — is so concerning. Early plans framed it as a Muslim-only community built around a mega-mosque and governed by Sharia-compliant financing. After state investigations were conducted, the branding changed, but the underlying intent remained the same.

Developers have openly described practices designed to keep non-Muslims out, using fees and ownership structures to create de facto religious exclusivity. This is not assimilation. It is the construction of a parallel society within a constitutional republic.

The warning from those who have lived under it

Years ago, local imams in Texas told me, without hesitation, that certain Sharia punishments “just work.” They spoke about cutting off hands for theft, stoning adulterers, and maintaining separate standards of testimony for men and women. They insisted it was logical and effective while insisting they would never attempt to implement it in Texas.

But when pressed, they could not explain why a system they consider divinely mandated would suddenly stop applying once someone crossed a border.

This is the contradiction at the heart of political Islam: It claims universal authority while insisting its harshest rules will never be enforced here. That promise does not stand up to scrutiny. It never has.

AASHISH KIPHAYET / Contributor | Getty Images

America is vulnerable

Europe is already showing us where this road leads. No-go zones, parallel courts, political intimidation, and clerics preaching supremacy have taken root across major cities.

America’s strength has always come from its melting pot, but assimilation requires boundaries. It requires insisting that the Constitution, not religious law, is the supreme authority on this soil.

Yet we are becoming complacent, even fearful, about saying so. We mistake silence for tolerance. We mistake avoidance for fairness. Meanwhile, political Islam views this hesitation as weakness.

Religious freedom is one of America’s greatest gifts. Muslims may worship freely here, as they should. But political Islam must not be permitted to plant a flag on American soil. The Constitution cannot coexist with a system that denies equal rights, restricts speech, subordinates women, and places clerical authority above civil law.

Wake up before it is too late

Projects like the Meadow are not isolated. They are test runs, footholds, proofs of concept. Political Islam operates with patience. It advances through demographic growth, legal ambiguity, and cultural hesitation — and it counts on Americans being too polite, too distracted, or too afraid to confront it.

We cannot afford that luxury. If we fail to defend the principles that make this country free, we will one day find ourselves asking how a parallel system gained power right in front of us. The answer will be simple: We looked away.

The time to draw boundaries and to speak honestly is now. The time to defend the Constitution as the supreme law of the land is now. Act while there is still time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Why do Americans feel so empty?

Mario Tama / Staff | Getty Images

Anxiety, anger, and chronic dissatisfaction signal a country searching for meaning. Without truth and purpose, politics becomes a dangerous substitute for identity.

We have built a world overflowing with noise, convenience, and endless choice, yet something essential has slipped out of reach. You can sense it in the restless mood of the country, the anxiety among young people who cannot explain why they feel empty, in the angry confusion that dominates our politics.

We have more wealth than any nation in history, but the heart of the culture feels strangely malnourished. Before we can debate debt or elections, we must confront the reality that we created a world of things, but not a world of purpose.

You cannot survive a crisis you refuse to name, and you cannot rebuild a world whose foundations you no longer understand.

What we are living through is not just economic or political dysfunction. It is the vacuum that appears when a civilization mistakes abundance for meaning.

Modern life is stuffed with everything except what the human soul actually needs. We built systems to make life faster, easier, and more efficient — and then wondered why those systems cannot teach our children who they are, why they matter, or what is worth living for.

We tell the next generation to chase success, influence, and wealth, turning childhood into branding. We ask kids what they want to do, not who they want to be. We build a world wired for dopamine rather than dignity, and then we wonder why so many people feel unmoored.

When everything is curated, optimized, and delivered at the push of a button, the question “what is my life for?” gets lost in the static.

The crisis beneath the headlines

It is not just the young who feel this crisis. Every part of our society is straining under the weight of meaninglessness.

Look at the debt cycle — the mathematical fate no civilization has ever escaped once it crosses a threshold that we seem to have already blown by. While ordinary families feel the pressure, our leaders respond with distraction, with denial, or by rewriting the very history that could have warned us.

You cannot survive a crisis you refuse to name, and you cannot rebuild a world whose foundations you no longer understand.

We have entered a cultural moment where the noise is so loud that it drowns out the simplest truths. We are living in a country that no longer knows how to hear itself think.

So people go searching. Some drift toward the false promise of socialism, some toward the empty thrill of rebellion. Some simply check out. When a culture forgets what gives life meaning, it becomes vulnerable to every ideology that offers a quick answer.

The quiet return of meaning

And yet, quietly, something else is happening. Beneath the frustration and cynicism, many Americans are recognizing that meaning does not come from what we own, but from what we honor. It does not rise from success, but from virtue. It does not emerge from noise, but from the small, sacred things that modern life has pushed to the margins — the home, the table, the duty you fulfill, the person you help when no one is watching.

The danger is assuming that this rediscovery happens on its own. It does not.

Reorientation requires intention. It requires rebuilding the habits and virtues that once held us together. It requires telling the truth about our history instead of rewriting it to fit today’s narratives. And it requires acknowledging what has been erased: that meaning is inseparable from God’s presence in a nation’s life.

Harold M. Lambert / Contributor | Getty Images

Where renewal begins

We have built a world without stillness, and then we wondered why no one can hear the questions that matter. Those questions remain, whether we acknowledge them or not. They do not disappear just because we drown them in entertainment or noise. They wait for us, and the longer we ignore them, the more disoriented we become.

Meaning is still available. It is found in rebuilding the smallest, most human spaces — the places that cannot be digitized, globalized, or automated. The home. The family. The community.

These are the daily virtues that do not trend on social media, but that hold a civilization upright. If we want to repair this country, we begin there, exactly where every durable civilization has always begun: one virtue at a time, one tradition at a time, one generation at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

A break in trust: A NEW Watergate is brewing in plain sight

Gary Hershorn / Contributor | Getty Images

When institutions betray the public’s trust, the country splits, and the spiral is hard to stop.

Something drastic is happening in American life. Headlines that should leave us stunned barely register anymore. Stories that once would have united the country instead dissolve into silence or shrugs.

It is not apathy exactly. It is something deeper — a growing belief that the people in charge either cannot or will not fix what is broken.

When people feel ignored or betrayed, they will align with anyone who appears willing to fight on their behalf.

I call this response the Bubba effect. It describes what happens when institutions lose so much public trust that “Bubba,” the average American minding his own business, finally throws his hands up and says, “Fine. I will handle it myself.” Not because he wants to, but because the system that was supposed to protect him now feels indifferent, corrupt, or openly hostile.

The Bubba effect is not a political movement. It is a survival instinct.

What triggers the Bubba effect

We are watching the triggers unfold in real time. When members of Congress publicly encourage active duty troops to disregard orders from the commander in chief, that is not a political squabble. When a federal judge quietly rewrites the rules so one branch of government can secretly surveil another, that is not normal. That is how republics fall. Yet these stories glided across the news cycle without urgency, without consequence, without explanation.

When the American people see the leadership class shrug, they conclude — correctly — that no one is steering the ship.

This is how the Bubba effect spreads. It is not just individuals resisting authority. It is sheriffs refusing to enforce new policies, school boards ignoring state mandates, entire communities saying, “We do not believe you anymore.” It becomes institutional, cultural, national.

A country cracking from the inside

This effect can be seen in Dearborn, Michigan. In the rise of fringe voices like Nick Fuentes. In the Epstein scandal, where powerful people could not seem to locate a single accountable adult. These stories are different in content but identical in message: The system protects itself, not you.

When people feel ignored or betrayed, they will align with anyone who appears willing to fight on their behalf. That does not mean they suddenly agree with everything that person says. It means they feel abandoned by the institutions that were supposed to be trustworthy.

The Bubba effect is what fills that vacuum.

The dangers of a faithless system

A republic cannot survive without credibility. Congress cannot oversee intelligence agencies if it refuses to discipline its own members. The military cannot remain apolitical if its chain of command becomes optional. The judiciary cannot defend the Constitution while inventing loopholes that erase the separation of powers.

History shows that once a nation militarizes politics, normalizes constitutional shortcuts, or allows government agencies to operate without scrutiny, it does not return to equilibrium peacefully. Something will give.

The question is what — and when.

The responsibility now belongs to us

In a healthy country, this is where the media steps in. This is where universities, pastors, journalists, and cultural leaders pause the outrage machine and explain what is at stake. But today, too many see themselves not as guardians of the republic, but of ideology. Their first loyalty is to narrative, not truth.

The founders never trusted the press more than the public. They trusted citizens who understood their rights, lived their responsibilities, and demanded accountability. That is the antidote to the Bubba effect — not rage, but citizenship.

How to respond without breaking ourselves

Do not riot. Do not withdraw. Do not cheer on destruction just because you dislike the target. That is how nations lose themselves. Instead, demand transparency. Call your representatives. Insist on consequences. Refuse to normalize constitutional violations simply because “everyone does it.” If you expect nothing, you will get nothing.

Do not hand your voice to the loudest warrior simply because he is swinging a bat at the establishment. You do not beat corruption by joining a different version of it. You beat it by modeling the country you want to preserve: principled, accountable, rooted in truth.

Adam Gray / Stringer | Getty Images

Every republic reaches a moment when historians will later say, “That was the warning.” We are living in ours. But warnings are gifts if they are recognized. Institutions bend. People fail. The Constitution can recover — if enough Americans still know and cherish it.

It does not take a majority. Twenty percent of the country — awake, educated, and courageous — can reset the system. It has happened before. It can happen again.

Wake up. Stand up. Demand integrity — from leaders, from institutions, and from yourself. Because the Bubba effect will not end until Americans reclaim the duty that has always belonged to them: preserving the republic for the next generation.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Warning: Stop letting TikTok activists think for you

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Bad-faith attacks on Israel and AIPAC warp every debate. Real answers emerge only when people set aside scripts and ask what serves America’s long-term interests.

The search for truth has always required something very much in short supply these days: honesty. Not performative questions, not scripted outrage, not whatever happens to be trending on TikTok, but real curiosity.

Some issues, often focused on foreign aid, AIPAC, or Israel, have become hotbeds of debate and disagreement. Before we jump into those debates, however, we must return to a simpler, more important issue: honest questioning. Without it, nothing in these debates matters.

Ask questions because you want the truth, not because you want a target.

The phrase “just asking questions” has re-entered the zeitgeist, and that’s fine. We should always question power. But too many of those questions feel preloaded with someone else’s answer. If the goal is truth, then the questions should come from a sincere desire to understand, not from a hunt for a villain.

Honest desire for truth is the only foundation that can support a real conversation about these issues.

Truth-seeking is real work

Right now, plenty of people are not seeking the truth at all. They are repeating something they heard from a politician on cable news or from a stranger on TikTok who has never opened a history book. That is not a search for answers. That is simply outsourcing your own thought.

If you want the truth, you need to work for it. You cannot treat the world like a Marvel movie where the good guy appears in a cape and the villain hisses on command. Real life does not give you a neat script with the moral wrapped up in two hours.

But that is how people are approaching politics now. They want the oppressed and the oppressor, the heroic underdog and the cartoon villain. They embrace this fantastical framing because it is easier than wrestling with reality.

This framing took root in the 1960s when the left rebuilt its worldview around colonizers and the colonized. Overnight, Zionism was recast as imperialism. Suddenly, every conflict had to fit the same script. Today’s young activists are just recycling the same narrative with updated graphics. Everything becomes a morality play. No nuance, no context, just the comforting clarity of heroes and villains.

Bad-faith questions

This same mindset is fueling the sudden obsession with Israel, and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in particular. You hear it from members of Congress and activists alike: AIPAC pulls the strings, AIPAC controls the government, AIPAC should register as a foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. The questions are dramatic, but are they being asked in good faith?

FARA is clear. The standard is whether an individual or group acts under the direction or control of a foreign government. AIPAC simply does not qualify.

Here is a detail conveniently left out of these arguments: Dozens of domestic organizations — Armenian, Cuban, Irish, Turkish — lobby Congress on behalf of other countries. None of them registers under FARA because — like AIPAC — they are independent, domestic organizations.

If someone has a sincere problem with the structure of foreign lobbying, fair enough. Let us have that conversation. But singling out AIPAC alone is not a search for truth. It is bias dressed up as bravery.

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

If someone wants to question foreign aid to Israel, fine. Let’s have that debate. But let’s ask the right questions. The issue is not the size of the package but whether the aid advances our interests. What does the United States gain? Does the investment strengthen our position in the region? How does it compare to what we give other nations? And do we examine those countries with the same intensity?

The real target

These questions reflect good-faith scrutiny. But narrowing the entire argument to one country or one dollar amount misses the larger problem. If someone objects to the way America handles foreign aid, the target is not Israel. The target is the system itself — an entrenched bureaucracy, poor transparency, and decades-old commitments that have never been re-examined. Those problems run through programs around the world.

If you want answers, you need to broaden the lens. You have to be willing to put aside the movie script and confront reality. You have to hold yourself to a simple rule: Ask questions because you want the truth, not because you want a target.

That is the only way this country ever gets clarity on foreign aid, influence, alliances, and our place in the world. Questioning is not just allowed. It is essential. But only if it is honest.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.