Glenn asked a Jewish man what it's like living in America right now. Here's what he said.

JOHANNES EISELE / Contributor | Getty Images

Glenn recently asked a well-known public intellectual what it is like living as a Jewish man in America today. Ever since Hamas unleashed its deadly terror attacks on the Israeli people on Oct. 7, there has been an onslaught of antisemitism that is harrowingly reminiscent of the years leading up to the Holocaust. A Russian mob in Dagestan flooded a regional airport hunting for Jews who were returning on a flight from Tel Aviv. Jewish students on college campuses still receive constant threats from pro-Palestinian groups. So-called activists, like Ahed Tamimi, have explicitly called for the brutal and grotesque murders of the Jewish people. These are only a few of the many instances of antisemitism rising across the West.

So how does it feel to be a Jew in America amid this shocking rise of antisemitism? Here are the thoughts of one Jewish public intellectual amid these tumultuous times:

An open letter from a Jewish man living in America

Dear Glenn,

You asked me to tell you what it’s like to be a Jewish person in America these days, and I had to decline to be interviewed. I can’t speak for the Jewish people as a whole any more than I can speak for the American people as a whole. I am just one human being, with strengths and weaknesses like everyone else. Personally, my social media has become almost unusable because of the constant anti-Jewish hatred, but the idea of me complaining about Twitter when people are being held hostage and children are being bombed is ridiculous. I thought a letter for you to read to your audience might be of greater help.

Terms like racism and homophobia and sexism are bandied about a lot in the media. But I have never heard of racists or homophobes or sexists calling for the murder of those whom they oppose. Those who hate Jews love to tell Jewish people we should get over the Holocaust while at the same time calling for another one. This is one of the major reasons why Israel is so necessary. If your very existence rests on the good nature of other people, at some point, they will fail you.

I have never heard of racists or homophobes or sexists calling for the murder of those whom they oppose.

This isn’t a uniquely Jewish principle. Americans know this quite well. It was in 1964 that Reagan pointed out that if Americans lose freedom here, there’s no place to escape to. The United States was the last stand on earth. After thousands of years, Israel is that last stand for the Jewish people.

Those who hate Jews love to tell Jewish people we should get over the Holocaust while at the same time calling for another one.

My heart goes out to the Palestinian people who are trapped between powerful forces greater than themselves. Many of the Arab nations would rather have war than refugees, and my only hope is for everyone in the Middle East to find a way to coexist, not “mostly” peacefully, but entirely peacefully. But if Israel fell and martyrdom became viewed as even more of a heroic action for the forces of jihad, then many more innocent people would pay the price all over the world. In fact, it would be the moderate Muslims who would be the next targets, as those in Turkey today and the Persians who fled Iran in 1979 understand quite well. We would see Jerusalem closed to non-Muslims, just as it is illegal for non-Muslims to visit Mecca today.

If Israel fell and martyrdom became viewed as even more of a heroic action for the forces of jihad, then many more innocent people would pay the price all over the world.

Alan Dershowitz once made the distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism as to whether you are applying the same standard across the board or are only having a problem with something when it is Jewish people doing whatever it is you have an issue with. It is absolutely the case that there are many Jews in power doing absolutely horrific things—George Soros being chief among them, and hardly a Zionist. Yet this standard often only applies to Jewish figures. When I think of Catholics, I think of social conservatism and having a veneration for human life. I certainly don’t think of Joe Biden and his crackhead son, or of San Francisco’s Nancy Pelosi and whatever that husband of hers was doing. Nor would I think that somehow the Pope or the Vatican was in any way responsible for their corruption.

My only hope is for everyone in the Middle East to find a way to coexist, not “mostly” peacefully, but entirely peacefully.

I see no shortage of awful things said by Jewish people throughout the centuries in exile and under oppression being quoted on social media with the claim being that this is what Jewish people secretly believe today. Yes, Glenn, these beliefs are so secret that neither I nor any other Jewish person I have met has ever held or espoused them. As a Mormon, I am sure you can relate to people telling you with a straight face that your faith is satanic when you are simply trying to the best of your ability to be a kind, decent, moral person—as are most people with the slightest bit of honest faith. Martin Luther wrote things that would make Hitler blush. Yet I never think for one second when meeting a Lutheran that they secretly hate me or think me an evil person. Nor does any remotely sane Christian believe any longer that the Jewish Passover meal is made with the blood of children—we are Jews, not politicians.

I get told that Jewish interests are un-American but then attacked for Jews supposedly having “dual loyalties”—an accusation all those people waving Ukrainian flags never have to worry about. People who support Israel are accused of being controlled by the Jews. Yet you and I and a huge percentage of your audience are greatly concerned about the growing authoritarianism in Canada, especially as it concerned the truckers. That does not make us “Canadian-controlled.” Nor does someone have to be a teamster to be worried about those hard-working men and their families. It just makes me human.

Thank you for your ongoing concern with this country, with Israel, and with all freedom-loving people of all faiths and nationalities all over the world.

POLL: What topics do YOU want Trump and Harris to debate?

Montinique Monroe / Stringer, Win McNamee / Staff | Getty Images

Does Kamala Harris stand a chance against Donald Trump in a debate?

Next week, during the second presidential debate, we will find out. The debate is scheduled for September 10th and will be hosted by ABC anchors David Muir and Linsey Davis. This will be the second presidential debate, but the first for VP Kamala Harris, and will feature the same rules as the first debate. The rules are: no notes, no chairs, no live audience, and the debater's microphone will only be turned on when it is his or her turn to speak.

This will be the first time Trump and Harris clash face-to-face, and the outcome could have a massive effect on the outcome of the election. Trump has been preparing by ramping up his campaign schedule. He plans to hold multiple rallies and speak at several events across the next several days. He wants to be prepared to face any question that might come his way, and meeting and interacting with both voters and the press seems to be Trump's preferred preparation approach.

With the multitude of issues plaguing our nation, there are a lot of potential topics that could be brought up. From the economy to the ongoing "lawfare" being waged against the former president, what topics do YOU want Harris and Trump to debate?

The economy (and why the Biden-Harris administration hasn't fixed it yet)

The Southern Border crisis (and Kamala's performance as border czar)

Climate change (and how Trump pulled out of the Paris Agreement)

The "lawfare" being waged against Trump (and what Trump would do if he were thrown in prison) 

Voting and election security (and how to deal with the possibility that illegal immigrants are voting)

3 ways the Constitution foils progressive authoritarianism

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / Contributor, Kevin Dietsch / Staff, Pool / Pool | Getty Images

This is why it is important to understand our history.

Over the weekend, the New York Times published a controversial article claiming the Constitution is a danger to the country and a threat to democracy. To those who have taken a high school American government class or have followed Glenn for a while, this claim might seem incongruent with reality. That's because Jennifer Szalai, the author the piece, isn't thinking of the Constitution as it was intended to be—a restraint on government to protect individual rights—but instead as a roadblock that is hindering the installation of a progressive oligarchy.

Glenn recently covered this unbelievable article during his show and revealed the telling critiques Szalai made of our founding document. She called it an "anti-democratic" document and argued it is flawed because Donald Trump used it to become president (sort of like how every other president achieved their office). From here, Szalai went off the deep end and made some suggestions to "fix" the Constitution, including breaking California and other blue states away from the union to create a coastal progressive utopia.

Here are three of the "flaws" Szalai pointed out in the Constitution that interfere with the Left's authoritarian dreams:

1. The Electoral College

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The New York Times article brought up the fact that in 2016 President Trump lost the popular vote but won the Electoral College, and thus won the election. This, as Szalai pointed out, is not democratic. Strictly speaking, she is right. But as Glenn has pointed out time and time again, America is not a democracy! The Founding Fathers did not want the president to be decided by a simple majority of 51 percent of the population. The Electoral College is designed to provide minority groups with a voice, giving them a say in the presidential election. Without the Electoral College, a simple majority would dominate elections and America would fall under the tyranny of the masses.

2. The Supreme Court

OLIVIER DOULIERY / Contributor | Getty Images

President Biden and other progressives have thrown around the idea of reforming the Supreme Court simply because it has made a few rulings they disagree with. Glenn points out that when a country decides to start monkeying around with their high courts, it is usually a sign they are becoming a banana republic. Szalai complained that Trump was allowed to appoint three justices. Two of them were confirmed by senators representing just 44 percent of the population, and they overturned Roe v. Wade. All of this is Constitutional by Szalai's admission, and because she disagreed with it, she argued the whole document should be scrapped.

3. Republicanism

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

To clarify, were not talking about the Republican Party Republicanism, but instead the form of government made up of a collection of elected representatives who govern on the behalf of their constituents. This seems to be a repeat sticking point for liberals, who insist conservatives and Donald Trump are out to destroy "democracy" (a system of government that never existed in America). This mix-up explains Szalai's nonsensical interpretation of how the Constitution functions. She criticized the Constitution as "anti-democratic" and a threat to American democracy. If the Constitution is the nation's framework, and if it is "anti-democratic" then how is it a threat to American democracy? This paradox is easily avoided with the understanding that America isn't a democracy, and it never has been.

Kamala Harris' first interview as nominee: Three SHOCKING policy flips

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

On Thursday, Kamala Harris gave her first interview since Joe Biden stepped down from the race, and it quickly becameclear why she waited so long.

Harris struggled to keep her story straight as CNN's Dana Bash questioned her about recent comments she had made that contradicted her previous policy statements. She kept on repeating that her "values haven't changed," but it is difficult to see how that can be true alongside her radical shift in policy. Either her values have changed or she is lying about her change in policy to win votes. You decide which seems more likely.

During the interview, Harris doubled down on her policy flip on fracking, the border, and even her use of the race card. Here are her top three flip-flops from the interview:

Fracking

Citizens of the Planet / Contributor | Getty Images

In 2019, during the 2020 presidential election, Harris pledged her full support behind a federal ban on fracking during a town hall event. But, during the DNC and again in this recent interview, Harris insisted that she is now opposed to the idea. The idea of banning fracking has been floated for a while now due to environmental concerns surrounding the controversial oil drilling method. Bans on fracking are opposed by many conservatives as it would greatly limit the production of oil in America, thus driving up gas prices across the nation. It seems Harris took this stance to win over moderates and to keep gas prices down, but who knows how she will behave once in office?

Border

PATRICK T. FALLON / Contributor | Getty Images

In her 2020 presidential bid, Harris was all for decriminalizing the border, but now she is singing a different tune. Harris claimed she is determined to secure the border—as if like she had always been a stalwart defender of the southern states. Despite this policy reversal, Harris claimed her values have not changed, which is hard to reconcile. The interviewer even offered Kamala a graceful out by suggesting she had learned more about the situation during her VP tenure, but Kamala insisted she had not changed.

Race

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

When asked to respond to Trump's comments regarding the sudden emergence of Kamala's black ancestry Kamala simply answered "Same old tired playbook, next question" instead of jumping on the opportunity to play the race card as one might expect. While skipping the critical race theory lecture was refreshing, it came as a shock coming from the candidate representing the "everything is racist" party. Was this just a way to deflect the question back on Trump, or have the Democrats decided the race card isn't working anymore?

The REAL questions that CNN should ask Kamala tonight

KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

The Democrats don't want the American people to know who they are voting for. It has been well over a month since Biden dropped out of the presidential race and Kamala was hastily installed in his place. During that time, Kamala has not given a single interview.

The Democrats' intention is clear: they have spent the last month gaslighting the American left into believing that Kamala is their new "super-candidate." Now that they've taken the bait, they can allow Kamala to take a softball interview to combat accusations from the Right.

Kamala's first interview will be hosted by Dana Bash on CNN and is scheduled for 9:00 p.m. ET tonight. Kamala will be joined by her running mate, Tim Walz, for an unusual interview. Between the tag-team approach and the more-than-sympathetic interviewer, it's almost certain that this will not be a particularly substantial interview full of easy, soft-ball, questions.

The American people deserve to know who is on the ballot, and that means that they should be able to see how their candidates stand up against tough questions. Here are five questions that CNN should ask Kamala tonight:

Will she build a border wall?

SOPA Images / Contributor | Getty Images

After years of bashing Trump for his proposed border wall, Kamala has suddenly changed her mind. During the DNC, Kamala pledged to support a bill that included money for a border wall and other border security measures. This change seems like a knee-jerk response to recent criticisms made about her abysmal performance as the "border czar." The question is: how genuine is it?

What is her stance on the Israel-Hamas war?

BASHAR TALEB / Contributor | Getty Images

Kamala has been mushy on the issue of the Israel-Hamas war so far. She said that she would support Israel while simultaneously expressing sympathy for the Palestinians in Gaza. With mounting pro-Hamas support within the American left, just how far is Kamala willing to go?

How does she explain defending Biden against allegations that he was too old for office now that those allegations have proven true?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

For the last four years, Kamala and the entire mainstream media have vehemently defended President Biden's mental fitness, despite countless incidents that indicated otherwise. After Biden's senile performance at the June presidential debate, the truth couldn't be hidden any longer, and Kamala was quickly swapped into his place. Now that the cat's out of the bag, how does Kamala justify her lies to protect the incompetent president?

How does she plan on fixing the economy, and why hasn't she already done it?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

Kamala has claimed that she could lower consumer prices starting on the first day of her administration, accompanied by other promises to fix the economy. So why the wait? If she knows how to fix the economy that is causing so many Americans to suffer, can't she do something right now as the Vice President? Why has the economy only gotten worse within her three-year tenure in the White House?

Why does she keep flipping on her policies? Where does it stop?

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

As mentioned above, Kamala has already changed her stance on a border wall, but it doesn't end there. During her 2019 presidential campaign, Kamala vowed to end fracking, a controversial method of drilling for oil, in the name of climate change. But now it seems her position has softened, with no mention of a fracking ban. Why does she keep changing her stance on these major policies? What other policies has she changed without any indication? Why has she so far failed to produce a clear campaign platform?