Jonathon Dunne: For the first time, I truly worry about America's future

October 04, 2018

Max Sulik/Unsplash

Contributor

As an Irishman and outsider, I have always been both amazed and inspired by the American way of life. When you study history, it's impossible to deny the benefits America has had on the lives of millions around the world. If you want proof, simply research any section of society (travel, communication, medicine, standard of living, hobbies, lifestyle, agriculture, etc.) and how it advanced from 0AD to 1800AD. Now take the exact same section of society and look at how it advanced from 1800AD to 2018. Why did society advance more in those 218 years than the prior 1800 combined?

There are countless ways to answer this question, but the simple version is the idea of America and the principles your founders fought for and died for 242 years ago:

Man is meant to be [live] free and not controlled, government should be extremely limited in power, man has a God-given right to pursue their happiness and keep the fruits of their labor.

Those principles truly changed the world, but principles alone cannot change the world. America needed a glue to bind them all together to be successful and in America that glue is your people. I believe in the sentiments of Alexis de Tocqueville that "America is great because Americans are good".

American People

I have been blessed to visit and speak with groups of people from New York to LA, from Chicago to Texas. Each state is unique, but there are common themes among your people. Americans are more open. You always have this amazing sense of optimism and a dream of future success, you have that drive of always striving for a better tomorrow, and maybe most impressive to me is your never give up attitude. I know very few Americans who would give up if you told them something was impossible. In fact, most Americans would use that as motivation to prove you wrong. It is for this reason alone that I believe America's tagline should be a simple one: Making the impossible possible since 1776.

The other key to America's success is how your people treat each other. You see this best in times of crisis. 9/11 was easily one of the worst days in American history – a day the world stopped and grieved with you. On 9/12, you showed the world the America I know exists – a day where politics and every difference was cast aside, a day when you were simply Americans and you sought to serve each other, love each other, and heal as a nation.

I got to witness this myself last year as I was in Texas after the horrific hurricane hit Houston and other areas. I heard countless stories of people going down to Houston with food, water, gas and others just going down to help and serve their fellow Americans. I even had the honor of speaking with a gentleman whose story I will never, ever forget. He was struggling for both money and full-time work, had no electricity in his own house, yet spent his last few dollars on filling drums of gas and going down to serve others. This is the America I know and love.

For the first time I am truly scared for your future...

America faces many problems today and in the future, but I firmly believe America has no problem your people cannot fix if you understand and follow your founding principles. That being said, for the first time I am truly scared for your future, because of what happened in your country last week and because of how some are starting to react to it. Please let me explain.

Rape / DC

I take rape (or attempted rape) very seriously. I think it is the worst thing you can do to somebody. I am actually rather extreme on this issue as I personally believe if you rape people, society should castrate you and also you should be put into a cell with no video or audio for 5 minutes with the survivor or a family member and let them do anything they want. I believe we need to send a message to society, that rape is never ever okay.

Unless you have been living under a rock, you are fully aware that there are serious allegations against your next SCOTUS nominee Brett Kavanaugh. I watched every minute of the hearings last Thursday and it was truly nothing short of a national disgrace. Let me share three main reasons why:

If you share my sentiments that rape is really bad, you should be disgusted at how the Democrats have acted in this process. Through the testimony of Mrs. Ford last week we learned several things about the Democrats.

Democrats / Politics

We know they held on to this information for 45 days so it would have the biggest impact on the news and the nomination process. They could have shared this information with the GOP when they received it, investigated it privately and through proper channels and found a conclusion. Instead, some Senators like Dianne Feinstein met with Kavanaugh but did not discuss the allegations and get his response. The actions by the Democrats show they will use anything or anyone to get a potential political gain.

Bad Advice

The second issue is the advice given to Mrs. Ford. She was advised to hire a lawyer (Feinstein even recommended some) and their advice was to get a polygraph which any lawyer should know is not admissible in court because they are not reliable. If they were really concerned with the truth and Mrs. Ford, they would have ensured she got the advice of sitting with a neutral investigator to tell her story un-interrupted and seek evidence that supports her case.

On top of this horrible advice are the constant calls for an FBI investigation. The FBI will not come to any conclusion about this case – they will simply provide he said / she said. If they truly cared about the truth and Mrs. Ford, they would give her the solution of ignoring the FBI and going right to the police in Maryland and making her allegation there. If she did, the police would have to investigate it. And, since Maryland has no statute of limitations, Brett Kavanaugh could be charged and if found guilty go to jail.

Kavanaugh Questions

The last part of this disgrace was the questions from the Democrats to Brett Kavanaugh on the record. If you believe everything said about him, Kavanaugh is a despicable human who has raped women in the past, is evil and people will die if he sits on SCOTUS. You have him testifying in the Senate (under the threat of perjury) and what do you decide to ask him? Instead of focusing on the allegations and seeking the truth, you focus on everything from his drinking, to high school yearbooks, to his weak stomach, farting, and to why he won't join calls for an FBI investigation which will do nothing. I would call it a charade, but that would be insulting to charades.

Democratic Behavior

There can be no denying the Democrats have acted in the most unprofessional and calculating way possible, while two people and their families are being destroyed by the court of public opinion. This is deeply troubling and is worrying about how low the Democratic Party will go to get power. My fear does not stop there. I am also extremely worried about how people will respond. I see two possible outcomes:

Anger / Vengeance

Firstly I can see people reacting in ways consistent with human nature and show emotions like anger and seek revenge. I can see people making the argument that if they don't play by the rules, why should we? You have already started to see this with comments from some on the right like:

Jerry Falwell: "Conservatives & Christians need to stop electing 'nice guys'. They might make great Christian leaders but the US needs street fighters"
Charlie Kirk: "The only way to thwart the sinister left is to punch back twice as hard".
Lindsey Graham: "If this is the new norm, you better watch out for your nominees".

I totally understand this reaction and it is very human. It will not work. This will only lead to America being more divided and following the French Revolution principle of brotherhood. It makes the battle into us versus them and can only be truly ended when one side is totally defeated and hope the side that wins is good. We saw this in the French revolution with the guillotine – can you say who were the good and bad guys in the French Revolution?

America's Founding Principles

The second option is to double down and return to America's founders for an example. Your Declaration of Independence is the roadmap and shows you three ways to actually win:

Today in politics, both sides are great at telling you what they are against. Democrats hate Republicans, Republicans hate Democrats and the media. Everyone can tell you what they don't like – even a baby out of the womb will communicate if it's cold or hungry. America's founders were exceptional because before they listed their 27 grievances against the King, they told you exactly what they were for.

America's founders were exceptional because before they listed their 27 grievances against the King, they told you exactly what they were for.

The battle today is not us versus them, or republicans versus democrats. The same way the battle at your founding was not America versus Britain. If it was solely about beating Britain, you would have followed a similar path to Ireland. You would have defeated Britain, removed them from your country, and then taken a version of their laws. You are exceptional because you chartered a new course that no one else had ever taken. Today's battle, like at your founding, is so much bigger. The battle is liberty versus tyranny or the battle of the laws of nature versus the laws of man.

Lastly, your founders signed off on the amazing document by pledging to each other their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. Your founders did everything possible to act with honor and they started your journey towards being an exceptional nation. Honor has always been critical to your culture – it's why y'all have the saying "don't be a Benedict Arnold," which is used to this day. If you need real-life proof of this in action, there is a reason why MLK won and Malcolm X lost and why only one of those men has a national holiday named after them.

Reflection

I know this path is not easy and plenty will dismiss it, but to finish up may I ask you some questions to reflect on?

Are the actions of the Democrats bad? If they are, why would you follow them and act like them?
Can principles be like trail mix? Can you pick and choose the times you use them? Or are principles eternal, and to be used regardless of the outcome?
If everyone in America abandons your founding principles to win this battle, who will stand for them? How can they survive, if no one uses them?

Jonathon hosts a weekly one hour show exclusive to the Blaze Radio Network called Freedom's Disciple where he highlights the IDEA of America, promotes the eternal principles of freedom & and shares his passion of America's Founding documents. Please check out his show for FREE on The Blaze and is available on all major platforms.

How California leadership is to blame for HORRIFIC wildfires

PATRICK T. FALLON / Contributor | Getty Images

California's progressive policies emphasize ideology over lifesaving solutions. The destruction will persist until voters hold their elected officials accountable.

America is no stranger to natural disasters. But it’s not the fires, floods, or earthquakes that are the most devastating — it’s the repeated failures to learn from them, prevent them, and take responsibility for the damage.

My heart goes out to the families who have lost homes, cherished memories, and livelihoods. But if we’re going to help California rebuild and prevent future disasters, we need to confront some uncomfortable truths about leadership, responsibility, and priorities.

California — ironically, in the name of environmentalism — continues to ignore solutions that would protect both the environment and its residents.

While Californians continue to face heart-wrenching losses, those who have the power to enact change are mired in bureaucracy, regulation, and ideologies that do nothing to protect lives or preserve the land. The result? A state that keeps burning, year after year.

Where did all the water go?

We all know that water is essential to life. When NASA searches for signs of life on other planets, it looks for water. Yet, California has spent decades neglecting its water infrastructure. The state hasn’t built a new major reservoir since 1979 — over 40 years ago. Back then, California’s population was roughly half what it is today. Despite massive population growth, the state’s water storage capacity has remained frozen in time, woefully inadequate for current needs.

Moreover, billions of gallons of rainwater flow straight into the ocean every year because no infrastructure exists to capture and store it. Imagine how different things could be if California had built reservoirs, aqueducts, and desalination plants to secure water for its dry seasons.

Water is life, but the state’s failure to prioritize this essential resource has put lives and ecosystems at risk.

Misplaced priorities and critical leadership failure

This neglect of critical infrastructure is part of a larger failure of vision, and in California, the consequences of that failure are on full display.

Consider the progressive leadership in Los Angeles, where the mayor cut the fire department’s budget to fund programs for the homeless, funneling money to NGOs with little oversight. While helping the homeless is a worthy cause, it cannot come at the expense of protecting lives and property from catastrophic fires. Leadership must put safety and well-being over political agendas, and that’s not happening in Los Angeles.

The same misplaced priorities extend to environmental policies. Progressive leaders have blocked sensible forest management practices, prioritizing dead trees over living creatures. They reject controlled burns, forest thinning, and other commonsense measures, bowing to the demands of activists rather than considering real solutions that would protect those they govern.

California’s wildfire crisis is, in many ways, a man-made disaster. Yes, factors like Southern California’s dry climate, strong Santa Ana winds, and little rain play a role, but the biggest contributing factor is poor land management.

The forests are choked with dry brush, dead trees, and vegetation that turn every spark into a potential inferno. The crisis could have been mitigated — if only the state had made forest management and fire prevention a higher priority.

Finland and Sweden, for example, understand the importance of maintaining healthy forests. These countries have perfected the art of clearing underbrush and thinning trees sustainably, turning potential fire fuel into biomass energy. This approach not only reduces the risk of wildfires, but it also creates jobs, boosts the economy, and improves the ecosystem. And yet, California — ironically, in the name of environmentalism — continues to ignore these solutions that would protect both the environment and its residents.

We need to stop pretending that something as devastating as the Palisades and Eaton fires are just “part of life” and hold leaders accountable.

Insurance rules put California residents at risk

California faces another major and often overlooked liability when it comes to natural disasters: insurance.

California’s ongoing disasters make the state an uninsurable risk. Insurance companies are pulling out because the odds of widespread devastation are just too high. This creates a vicious cycle: With private insurers gone, the government steps in to subsidize high-risk areas. This enables people to rebuild in fire-prone zones, perpetuating the destruction. The solution isn’t more government intervention; it’s better decision-making.

This doesn’t mean abandoning people to their fate, but we must address the root of the problem: California’s inadequate disaster preparedness and poor land management. If the state continues to resist commonsense solutions like forest thinning, controlled burns, and better zoning laws, no amount of insurance or government assistance will ever be enough to mitigate the losses. The cycle will repeat until the costs — financial and human — become unbearable. It’s time to stop pretending the risk isn’t real and start making decisions that reflect the reality of California’s landscape.

What’s the solution? California’s government needs to put its people over harmful political agendas that put its residents at risk. Start by managing your forests. Implement controlled burns, remove dead trees, and clear underbrush.

But how you vote matters. California’s progressive policies have focused on political correctness and ideology instead of practical, lifesaving solutions. Until voters hold leaders accountable, the cycle of destruction will persist.

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

Crazy enough to be true? The connection between the Cybertruck bomber and cryptic drones

WADE VANDERVORT / Contributor | Getty Images

Not knowing — and not being told — fuels distrust and speculation.

A chilling story has emerged: A whistleblower, claiming to possess knowledge of advanced military technologies and covert operations, took his own life in a shocking explosion outside the Trump Hotel in Las Vegas. He left behind a manifesto filled with claims so extraordinary they sound like science fiction. Yet if even a fraction of them prove true, the implications are staggering and demand immediate attention.

This whistleblower alleges that the United States and China developed “gravitic propulsion systems,” technologies that manipulate gravity itself to enable silent, undetectable flight at unimaginable speeds. According to his claims, these systems are not theoretical — they are operational, deployed both in the United States and China. If true, this would render conventional defense systems obsolete, fundamentally altering the global balance of power.

America’s founders warned us about unchecked government power. Today, their warnings feel more relevant than ever.

Imagine aircraft that defy radar, heat signatures, and missile defense systems. They carry massive payloads, conduct surveillance, and operate without a sound. If such technologies exist, they pose a national security threat unlike any we’ve faced.

But why haven’t we been told? If these claims are false, they must be debunked transparently. If true, the public has a right to know how such technologies are being used and safeguarded.

The whistleblower’s manifesto goes farther, claiming that with this technology, the United States and China developed and deployed the infamous drones that were seen across the United States starting late last year. He alleged that China launched them from submarines along the U.S. East Coast, calling them “the most dangerous threat to national security” because of their stealth, ability to evade detection, and unlimited payload capacity. He ties this advanced technology to other surveillance systems, creating a network so advanced it makes our current intelligence capabilities look primitive.

These claims may sound far-fetched, but they highlight a deeper issue: the cost of government secrecy. Not knowing — and not being told — fuels distrust and speculation. Without transparency, these incidents dangerously erode public confidence in our leaders and institutions.

The cost of secrecy

Beyond technology, the manifesto also alleges moral failures, including war crimes and deliberate cover-ups during U.S. airstrikes in Afghanistan. In one particularly harrowing claim, the whistleblower describes attacks in Afghanistan’s Nimroz Province in 2019. He alleges that 125 buildings were targeted, with 65 struck, resulting in hundreds of civilian deaths in a single day. Even after civilians were spotted, he claims, the strikes continued knowingly and deliberately.

The United Nations investigated similar incidents and confirmed civilian casualties during these operations. However, the whistleblower’s accusations go farther, implicating high-ranking officials, the Department of Defense, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Central Intelligence Agency, and even top military generals in a broader pattern of deceit, eroding the moral integrity of our military and government.

Whether these specific claims hold up, they underscore a larger issue: Secrecy breeds corruption. When people in power hide their actions and evade accountability, they break trust — and everyone pays the price, not just those at the top but also the citizens and soldiers they serve.

Transparency is an imperative

America’s founders warned us about unchecked government power. Today, their warnings feel more relevant than ever. From the COVID-19 pandemic to the Capitol riot on January 6 to the potential misuse of advanced technologies, the American people have been kept in the dark for too long.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and sunlight is coming. Transparency must become our rallying cry. As we look to the future, we must demand accountability — not just from those we oppose politically but from all leaders entrusted with power. This isn’t about partisanship; it’s about preserving our nation from self-destruction.

As we enter a new chapter in our nation’s history, the stakes couldn’t be higher. Whether it’s uncovering the truth about advanced technology, holding perpetrators of corruption accountable, or seeking justice for war crimes, we must act. This isn’t just a call to action — it’s a moral imperative.

Our strength lies in our unity and our resolve. The powerful fear an informed and vocal citizenry. Let’s prove them right. By demanding transparency and accountability, we can restore trust and ensure that the government serves the people — not the other way around.

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

Has Zuckerberg REALLY changed?

Mark Zuckerberg's recent announcement to lift content moderation policies across all of Meta's platforms and end the company's reliance on third-party fact-checkers, at first glance, is an incredible left turn given the platform's long-term participation in online censorship. However, does their shift signal a genuine change of heart, or are there more selfish motivations at play?

On the Glenn Beck Program, Glenn and Stu looked at both perspectives. On the one hand, Zuckerberg's announcement, adding UFC President and avid Trump supporter Dana White to Meta's board of directors indicates major progress in America's pushback against online censorship. However, Glenn also posited that Zuckerberg's intentions are chiefly to win the good graces of the incoming Trump administration in order to maintain Meta's controversial work in virtual and augmented reality technologies (VR/AR).

There is evidence for both perspectives, and we lay it all out for you below:

Did Zuck have a genuine change of heart?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

Zuckerberg’s bombshell announcement, at face value, suggests that Meta recognizes the greater demand for free speech on online platforms and growing discontent against content moderation that has censored non-mainstream political opinions, including Glenn and Blaze Media. Zuckerberg described this shift as an authentic attempt to return to the company’s roots of promoting free expression, acknowledging past mistakes in suppressing voices and content deemed politically controversial. Moreover, Meta's new adoption of community-driven content flags similar to X positions itself as a platform that values user input rather than the biased perspective of any single third-party "fact-checker."

Additionally, Zuckerberg’s evolving views on Donald Trump strengthen the argument that his "change of heart" is genuine. Before the 2024 election, Zuckerberg expressed admiration for Trump, even calling him a "badass" after the first assassination attempt, noting how the event changed his perspective on the then-presidential candidate. Moreover, his embrace of new board members, such as UFC President Dana White, a staunch Trump supporter, further suggests that Meta may be diversifying its leadership and welcoming a more inclusive approach to varied political opinions. In this context, Meta’s move away from fact-checking can be interpreted as a commitment to fostering an environment where free speech and diverse political perspectives are genuinely valued.

Or is it about self-preservation?

DREW ANGERER / Contributor | Getty Images

While it is tempting to view Meta’s policy change as a sincere commitment to free speech, there is also a compelling argument that the company’s motivations are rooted in self-preservation. Glenn suggested Meta’s financial interests, particularly in virtual and augmented reality (VR/AR) technologies, indicate its pivot may be less about principle and more about ensuring continued government contracts and capital flow. Zuckerberg’s significant investments in VR/AR technology, which has already cost the company billions, may be driving his need to align Meta’s policies with the political climate to safeguard future funding from both the government and private sectors.

Moreover, the company’s financial projections for the coming years show a sharp increase in advertising revenue, driven primarily by Facebook’s dominance in social media. This revenue helps sustain Meta’s ambitions in the VR/AR space, where it faces significant losses. The government’s involvement in funding military and tech projects tied to VR/AR underscores the importance of maintaining favorable political relationships. For these reasons, many view Zuckerberg's policy change as an attempt to position Meta for maximum political and financial benefit.

POLL: Is GLOBAL WARMING responsible for the fires in L.A.?

Apu Gomes / Stringer | Getty Images

As wildfires sweep across California and threaten to swallow up entire neighborhoods in Los Angeles, one question is on everyone's mind: What went wrong?

So far over 45 square miles of the city have been scorched, while the intense smoke is choking out the rest of L.A. Thousands of structures, including many family homes, have been destroyed, and many more are at risk as firefighters battle the flames. Many on the left, including Senator Bernie Sanders, have been quick to point to climate change as the cause of the devastating fires, citing the chronic lack of rain in L.A.

Others, including Glenn, have pointed out another potential cause: the severe mismanagement of the forests and water supply of Los Angeles and California in general. Unlike many other states and most other forested countries, California does not clear out the dead trees and dry vegetation that builds up on the forest floor and acts as kindling, fueling the fire as it whips through the trees.

On top of this, California has neglected its water supply for decades despite its crucial role in combating fires. The state of California has not built a new major water reservoir to store and capture water since the 1970s, leading to repeat water shortages in Southern California. To top it off, Gavin Newsom personally derailed a 2020 Trump order to divert water from areas of the state with excess water to parched Southern California. Why? To save an already functionally extinct fish. Now firefighters in L.A. are running out of water as the city is engulfed in flames. At least the fish are okay...

But what do you think? Are the wildfires a product of years of mismanagement? Or a symptom of a changing climate? Let us know in the poll below:

Glenn's Show Prep