This is the quality that all leaders should have

Authenticity. It's something that certainly seems to be in short supply in America today, especially when it comes to our leaders. Do you feel like you know what any of the politicians in Washington really believe? Or even why they believe it? With few exceptions, you probably don't. And that's a big, big problem - because America has changed and the people demand authenticity and character from our leaders.

On the radio show today, Glenn explained exactly what he wants out of leaders - and it's a lesson every poltician needs to learn.

Below is an edited transcript of Glenn's monologue on authenticity:

We live today in a society of misfits and underdogs and tramps. Everybody today is weird. The days of sitting in an office wearing a suit and tie or a skirt and a blouse while taking orders from a boss or taking dictation rapidly coming to an end. We feel more free to dress casually. We feel more free to question leaders. We feel more free to shave every third day, at most.

Walk into a Starbucks at peak hours, you see it. This is America. Some are in line, some are in a hurry, some are seated alone, some are sitting there with their computer or tablet, some are seated together having personal or business discussions, but I will tell you it is not the coffee shop of 1958. And that's a good thing.

But now look at the Republican Party. Let's look at Mitt Romney during his campaign, George W. Bush in the White House, or his father. Look at Ronald Reagan as president, Ford or Nixon. White shirts, neatly pressed suits, neatly parted hair, fathers who were king of their castle, fathers know best, 'my way or the highway' kind of dads. And there's nothing wrong with this.

When Reagan, however, was on his ranch, that was a different thing because it bucked that image that the Hollywood crowd and the progressive left liked to create for Ronald Reagan. It changed who you knew he was. When he was in jeans and a flannel shirt and he was on the back of his horse, you knew who he was, the true Ronald Reagan. He should have spent more time there.

I don't know about you, but as a voter I'm not looking for a dad. I don't need another dad. I got one. And when I was under his roof and he was paying the bills, I followed his rules.

What I do want is a politician that has strong morals, strong beliefs, convictions, somebody who will actually stand up for what they believe and know what they believe.

When I did my interview with FOX, it was the strangest interview I've ever had in my life. Roger Ailes had invited me for dinner, and I sat down for dinner, and he asked me some of the strangest questions I've ever been asked. I mean, it was a genius interview, it really was. I sat down and he said to me, "What'd you think of the Korean War," something like that. And I happened to be reading something at the time about that time period. So I skated.

The third question was, "What did you think of the China summit in 1972?" And I looked at him and I said: "You know what, Mr. Ailes? I could bluff right now, I could bluff and I could tell you a bunch of stuff that I'm pulling out of the air but I have a feeling you're smart enough to know that I'm completely bluffing. So I'm going to do something that could blow this whole interview, but that's okay. Uh... I have no idea about that treaty and the summit. I have no idea, and I'd completely be bluffing if I said otherwise."

He said, Hmmm. And then sat in silence for about five minutes and said nothing. And neither did I. And I was like, "Well, that was a short interview. That was good."

He just kept throwing me up against the wall. I think I lost about 8 pounds sitting at a meal with that guy. It was brilliant. I don't know if he does this to other people, but it was absolutely brilliant.

At the end, he got up from the table and I thought, "I'll never see this guy again." He got up from the table and he said, "Young man, it's good to be with people who actually know what they believe, but more importantly, know why they believe it. We'll talk again."

And that was it.

That's really what I want from a candidate. I want somebody who not only knows what they believe, but I want to know why they believe it. I want to know that they know why they believe it.

In fact, forget about politics. I want that in life. If I have a boss, that's what I want from a boss. That's what I want from coworkers. It's what I want from employees. Why do you believe that? Why'd you do that?

I want somebody who I could actually sit down with at a Starbucks and have a real conversation. I'm not looking for an authoritarian figure. I want somebody who understands what it's like to be out in the real world.

Do you know when they -- when they put this healthcare thing together, they didn't have anybody who had actually started a business before. What a surprise. They're not surrounded by anybody who runs a business or has ever run a business. They don't know. And that's why it's running so poorly: Because they don't put any stock. You didn't build this. The government did. They just really believe that running a business just happens: You open up the door, you sell stuff, you rip people off, you go home at night and count your money. That's what they really believe business is and so when they had to do something that revolved around business, it didn't work.

You know, authoritarian figures, we talk about dictators being bad, but Father Knows Best I get. I get. It's not a dictator that's setting boundaries and raising responsible kids. Dictators don't do that. Dictators set rules and treat you like a child, but we're equals, aren't we? Aren't we equals? If I elect you to a job, aren't you an equal? Do you feel that anybody in Washington, Republican or Democrat, are treating you like an equal? That's the image they try to give to everybody.

I'm not looking for an authoritarian leader. I'm looking for a leader of individuals and one who understands the individual, a leader who speaks from the heart, a leader who knows who he is, authentically knows who he is, isn't afraid to show it, a leader who isn't all about himself but is about the individual. They may not know the individuals by name or anything else but knows that that's really what it's all about.

Put aside the ideological differences that we might have. Those are important, but not the purpose here. What the conservatives need, what libertarians need, what TEA Party people need is Reagan on his ranch, Harry Truman in his Buick. When Harry Truman went home from the president, he didn't take a helicopter to a plane. He said, "Pull the Buick up." They said, "Mr. President, you haven't driven for a long time." He said, "I know. I want to drive home." In fact, he drove home. He said, "I've never been on the new highway system. I want to drive home." So he drove home. Cops stopped him halfway home. Bess slid over on those big bench seats and said, "Officer, would you tell him he's driving too slow?" He said, "Mrs. Truman? Mr. President?".

We want a leader who just wants to be a normal guy, a leader who listens, a leader who cares, a leader who will sit down and have a real conversation, and it's not about what's after the presidency. Not somebody who comes across as a guy like that, but somebody who is a guy like that.

So many politicians, including TEA Party politicians say, "What America deserves...the American people deserve better...Our Constitution clearly states that all men are created equal." Every time I hear one of these guys say something like that, I feel like they're talking to the room. They're talking to this big collective thing. You see it in the Senate, you see it in the House, you see it in the White House, you see it on the campaign trail. It's like you're watching C-Span all the time.

Tell me who you are. Tell me a story about what America is, but actually believe that story. Say "you" when you talk. Talk to me one on one. Reach down. Take a sip of coffee and have a real conversation. Tell me that you hear what I'm saying but "You know, I think I disagree with you." Even if you know I'm going to dislike it. I'd much rather have an authentic leader, an authentic human than anything we're seeing prop up.

Tomorrow is election day and there's more choices in front of America, and we will indeed make those choices one way or another. But we will make the choice of more authoritarian rule, and that comes from the Republicans and the Democrats. The Republicans are just as bad, gang. Boy, did I used to get yelled at for that. "Stop saying the Republicans are just as bad." They are. In fact, they may be worse. Because at least with the Democrats, they're not saying that they're against authoritarian rule. They're not saying "I'm so against big government" and then give it to you.

Tomorrow we make some more decisions, but every day we make decisions. Every day we decide who we're going to be.

I will tell you that in many ways I'm really optimistic. In many ways I know that what's coming will be good. Might be painful along the way, but it will be good. And my imagination, as big as my imagination is, I can't imagine what God has in store. I can't imagine what you're doing in your life. I can't imagine all of the things that are happening all around the world that are good right now. But I know they'll happen. The question is will we be brave enough to be ourselves? Will we be brave enough and wise enough to choose somebody who really is real? Will we be brave enough to say they don't all have to be that way? They don't all have to be on the take.

Did you see Mike Lee had a ten minute ovation? I think people came out to the park, so they had to stand. But a ten-minute ovation for Mike Lee on Saturday. Do you know that Ted Cruz's popularity rating is at 80% here in the state? You're not hearing that, are you? And by the way, it's not 80% Republican in Texas. I don't know if you know that. That tells you something. That tells you something: That people want somebody just to say "This is who I am and this is what I'm going to do.".

What's more disturbing is that we don't seem to care about it. What's more disturbing perhaps is that The New York Times, in an editorial, said that he didn't lie, he didn't really lie. When he said you can keep your doctor and you can keep your health insurance and that they had the studies that showed that up to 80 million people would lose their health insurance, now we find out, this week we find out that that number is actually 125 million, half of the population of the United States? They knew half of the population of the United States would lose their doctor and their health insurance and yet, he went on the road over and over and over and over and over again and said "You'll be able to keep your doctor if you like them, you'll be able to keep your health insurance" when they knew half of the population of the United States would lose their health insurance. And the New York Times said he misspoke. Boy. I think we all need a new dictionary because you know what? We've created the Tower of Babel because it's like babbling to me.

I have no idea what anybody's even talking about anymore.

I speak a different language. That language is common sense. Things that you don't have to teach people. They just find them to be self-evident.

How America’s elites fell for the same lie that fueled Auschwitz

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

The drone footage out of Gaza isn’t just war propaganda — it’s a glimpse of the same darkness that once convinced men they were righteous for killing innocents.

Evil introduces itself subtly. It doesn’t announce, “Hi, I’m here to destroy you.” It whispers. It flatters. It borrows the language of justice, empathy, and freedom, twisting them until hatred sounds righteous and violence sounds brave.

We are watching that same deception unfold again — in the streets, on college campuses, and in the rhetoric of people who should know better. It’s the oldest story in the world, retold with new slogans.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage.

A drone video surfaced this week showing Hamas terrorists staging the “discovery” of a hostage’s body. They pushed a corpse out of a window, dragged it into a hole, buried it, and then called in aid workers to “find” what they themselves had planted. It was theater — evil, disguised as victimhood. And it was caught entirely on camera.

That’s how evil operates. It never comes in through the front door. It sneaks in, often through manipulative pity. The same spirit animates the moral rot spreading through our institutions — from the halls of universities to the chambers of government.

Take Zohran Mamdani, a New York assemblyman who has praised jihadists and defended pro-Hamas agitators. His father, a Columbia University professor, wrote that America and al-Qaeda are morally equivalent — that suicide bombings shouldn’t be viewed as barbaric. Imagine thinking that way after watching 3,000 Americans die on 9/11. That’s not intellectualism. That’s indoctrination.

Often, that indoctrination comes from hostile foreign actors, peddled by complicit pawns on our own soil. The pro-Hamas protests that erupted across campuses last year, for example, were funded by Iran — a regime that murders its own citizens for speaking freely.

Ancient evil, new clothes

But the deeper danger isn’t foreign money. It’s the spiritual blindness that lets good people believe resentment is justice and envy is discernment. Scripture talks about the spirit of Amalek — the eternal enemy of God’s people, who attacks the weak from behind while the strong look away. Amalek never dies; it just changes its vocabulary and form with the times.

Today, Amalek tweets. He speaks through professors who defend terrorism as “anti-colonial resistance.” He preaches from pulpits that call violence “solidarity.” And he recruits through algorithms, whispering that the Jews control everything, that America had it coming, that chaos is freedom. Those are ancient lies wearing new clothes.

When nations embrace those lies, it’s not the Jews who perish first. It’s the nations themselves. The soul dies long before the body. The ovens of Auschwitz didn’t start with smoke; they started with silence and slogans.

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

A time for choosing

So what do we do? We speak truth — calmly, firmly, without venom. Because hatred can’t kill hatred; it only feeds it. Truth, compassion, and courage starve it to death.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage. That’s how Amalek survives — by making you fight him with his own weapons. The only victory that lasts is moral clarity without malice, courage without cruelty.

The war we’re fighting isn’t new. It’s the same battle between remembrance and amnesia, covenant and chaos, humility and pride. The same spirit that whispered to Pharaoh, to Hitler, and to every mob that thought hatred could heal the world is whispering again now — on your screens, in your classrooms, in your churches.

Will you join it, or will you stand against it?

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Bill Gates ends climate fear campaign, declares AI the future ruler

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The Big Tech billionaire once said humanity must change or perish. Now he claims we’ll survive — just as elites prepare total surveillance.

For decades, Americans have been told that climate change is an imminent apocalypse — the existential threat that justifies every intrusion into our lives, from banning gas stoves to rationing energy to tracking personal “carbon scores.”

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates helped lead that charge. He warned repeatedly that the “climate disaster” would be the greatest crisis humanity would ever face. He invested billions in green technology and demanded the world reach net-zero emissions by 2050 “to avoid catastrophe.”

The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch.

Now, suddenly, he wants everyone to relax: Climate change “will not lead to humanity’s demise” after all.

Gates was making less of a scientific statement and more of a strategic pivot. When elites retire a crisis, it’s never because the threat is gone — it’s because a better one has replaced it. And something else has indeed arrived — something the ruling class finds more useful than fear of the weather.The same day Gates downshifted the doomsday rhetoric, Amazon announced it would pay warehouse workers $30 an hour — while laying off 30,000 people because artificial intelligence will soon do their jobs.

Climate panic was the warm-up. AI control is the main event.

The new currency of power

The world once revolved around oil and gas. Today, it revolves around the electricity demanded by server farms, the chips that power machine learning, and the data that can be used to manipulate or silence entire populations. The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch. Whoever controls energy now controls information. And whoever controls information controls civilization.

Climate alarmism gave elites a pretext to centralize power over energy. Artificial intelligence gives them a mechanism to centralize power over people. The future battles will not be about carbon — they will be about control.

Two futures — both ending in tyranny

Americans are already being pushed into what look like two opposing movements, but both leave the individual powerless.

The first is the technocratic empire being constructed in the name of innovation. In its vision, human work will be replaced by machines, and digital permissions will subsume personal autonomy.

Government and corporations merge into a single authority. Your identity, finances, medical decisions, and speech rights become access points monitored by biometric scanners and enforced by automated gatekeepers. Every step, purchase, and opinion is tracked under the noble banner of “efficiency.”

The second is the green de-growth utopia being marketed as “compassion.” In this vision, prosperity itself becomes immoral. You will own less because “the planet” requires it. Elites will redesign cities so life cannot extend beyond a 15-minute walking radius, restrict movement to save the Earth, and ration resources to curb “excess.” It promises community and simplicity, but ultimately delivers enforced scarcity. Freedom withers when surviving becomes a collective permission rather than an individual right.

Both futures demand that citizens become manageable — either automated out of society or tightly regulated within it. The ruling class will embrace whichever version gives them the most leverage in any given moment.

Climate panic was losing its grip. AI dependency — and the obedience it creates — is far more potent.

The forgotten way

A third path exists, but it is the one today’s elites fear most: the path laid out in our Constitution. The founders built a system that assumes human beings are not subjects to be monitored or managed, but moral agents equipped by God with rights no government — and no algorithm — can override.

Hesham Elsherif / Stringer | Getty Images

That idea remains the most “disruptive technology” in history. It shattered the belief that people need kings or experts or global committees telling them how to live. No wonder elites want it erased.

Soon, you will be told you must choose: Live in a world run by machines or in a world stripped down for planetary salvation. Digital tyranny or rationed equality. Innovation without liberty or simplicity without dignity.

Both are traps.

The only way

The only future worth choosing is the one grounded in ordered liberty — where prosperity and progress exist alongside moral responsibility and personal freedom and human beings are treated as image-bearers of God — not climate liabilities, not data profiles, not replaceable hardware components.

Bill Gates can change his tune. The media can change the script. But the agenda remains the same.

They no longer want to save the planet. They want to run it, and they expect you to obey.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Why the White House restoration sent the left Into panic mode

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Presidents have altered the White House for decades, yet only Donald Trump is treated as a vandal for privately funding the East Wing’s restoration.

Every time a president so much as changes the color of the White House drapes, the press clutches its pearls. Unless the name on the stationery is Barack Obama’s, even routine restoration becomes a national outrage.

President Donald Trump’s decision to privately fund upgrades to the White House — including a new state ballroom — has been met with the usual chorus of gasps and sneers. You’d think he bulldozed Monticello.

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s ‘visionary.’

The irony is that presidents have altered and expanded the White House for more than a century. President Franklin D. Roosevelt added the East and West Wings in the middle of the Great Depression. Newspapers accused him of building a palace while Americans stood in breadlines. History now calls it “vision.”

First lady Nancy Reagan faced the same hysteria. Headlines accused her of spending taxpayer money on new china “while Americans starved.” In truth, she raised private funds after learning that the White House didn’t have enough matching plates for state dinners. She took the ridicule and refused to pass blame.

“I’m a big girl,” she told her staff. “This comes with the job.” That was dignity — something the press no longer recognizes.

A restoration, not a renovation

Trump’s project is different in every way that should matter. It costs taxpayers nothing. Not a cent. The president and a few friends privately fund the work. There’s no private pool or tennis court, no personal perks. The additions won’t even be completed until after he leaves office.

What’s being built is not indulgence — it’s stewardship. A restoration of aging rooms, worn fixtures, and century-old bathrooms that no longer function properly in the people’s house. Trump has paid for cast brass doorknobs engraved with the presidential seal, restored the carpets and moldings, and ensured that the architecture remains faithful to history.

The media’s response was mockery and accusations of vanity. They call it “grotesque excess,” while celebrating billion-dollar “climate art” projects and funneling hundreds of millions into activist causes like the No Kings movement. They lecture America on restraint while living off the largesse of billionaires.

The selective guardians of history

Where was this sudden reverence for history when rioters torched St. John’s Church — the same church where every president since James Madison has worshipped? The press called it an “expression of grief.”

Where was that reverence when mobs toppled statues of Washington, Jefferson, and Grant? Or when first lady Melania Trump replaced the Rose Garden’s lawn with a patio but otherwise followed Jackie Kennedy’s original 1962 plans in the garden’s restoration? They called that “desecration.”

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s “visionary.”

The real desecration

The people shrieking about “historic preservation” care nothing for history. They hate the idea that something lasting and beautiful might be built by hands they despise. They mock craftsmanship because it exposes their own cultural decay.

The White House ballroom is not a scandal — it’s a mirror. And what it reflects is the media’s own pettiness. The ruling class that ridicules restoration is the same class that cheered as America’s monuments fell. Its members sneer at permanence because permanence condemns them.

Julia Beverly / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s improvements are an act of faith — in the nation’s symbols, its endurance, and its worth. The outrage over a privately funded renovation says less about him than it does about the journalists who mistake destruction for progress.

The real desecration isn’t happening in the East Wing. It’s happening in the newsrooms that long ago tore up their own foundation — truth — and never bothered to rebuild it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Trump’s secret war in the Caribbean EXPOSED — It’s not about drugs

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The president’s moves in Venezuela, Guyana, and Colombia aren’t about drugs. They’re about re-establishing America’s sovereignty across the Western Hemisphere.

For decades, we’ve been told America’s wars are about drugs, democracy, or “defending freedom.” But look closer at what’s unfolding off the coast of Venezuela, and you’ll see something far more strategic taking shape. Donald Trump’s so-called drug war isn’t about fentanyl or cocaine. It’s about control — and a rebirth of American sovereignty.

The aim of Trump’s ‘drug war’ is to keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

The president understands something the foreign policy class forgot long ago: The world doesn’t respect apologies. It respects strength.

While the global elites in Davos tout the Great Reset, Trump is building something entirely different — a new architecture of power based on regional independence, not global dependence. His quiet campaign in the Western Hemisphere may one day be remembered as the second Monroe Doctrine.

Venezuela sits at the center of it all. It holds the world’s largest crude oil reserves — oil perfectly suited for America’s Gulf refineries. For years, China and Russia have treated Venezuela like a pawn on their chessboard, offering predatory loans in exchange for control of those resources. The result has been a corrupt, communist state sitting in our own back yard. For too long, Washington shrugged. Not any more.The naval exercises in the Caribbean, the sanctions, the patrols — they’re not about drug smugglers. They’re about evicting China from our hemisphere.

Trump is using the old “drug war” playbook to wage a new kind of war — an economic and strategic one — without firing a shot at our actual enemies. The goal is simple: Keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

Beyond Venezuela

Just east of Venezuela lies Guyana, a country most Americans couldn’t find on a map a year ago. Then ExxonMobil struck oil, and suddenly Guyana became the newest front in a quiet geopolitical contest. Washington is helping defend those offshore platforms, build radar systems, and secure undersea cables — not for charity, but for strategy. Control energy, data, and shipping lanes, and you control the future.

Moreover, Colombia — a country once defined by cartels — is now positioned as the hinge between two oceans and two continents. It guards the Panama Canal and sits atop rare-earth minerals every modern economy needs. Decades of American presence there weren’t just about cocaine interdiction; they were about maintaining leverage over the arteries of global trade. Trump sees that clearly.

PEDRO MATTEY / Contributor | Getty Images

All of these recent news items — from the military drills in the Caribbean to the trade negotiations — reflect a new vision of American power. Not global policing. Not endless nation-building. It’s about strategic sovereignty.

It’s the same philosophy driving Trump’s approach to NATO, the Middle East, and Asia. We’ll stand with you — but you’ll stand on your own two feet. The days of American taxpayers funding global security while our own borders collapse are over.

Trump’s Monroe Doctrine

Critics will call it “isolationism.” It isn’t. It’s realism. It’s recognizing that America’s strength comes not from fighting other people’s wars but from securing our own energy, our own supply lines, our own hemisphere. The first Monroe Doctrine warned foreign powers to stay out of the Americas. The second one — Trump’s — says we’ll defend them, but we’ll no longer be their bank or their babysitter.

Historians may one day mark this moment as the start of a new era — when America stopped apologizing for its own interests and started rebuilding its sovereignty, one barrel, one chip, and one border at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.