Do black lives really matter? Glenn reads the stunning list of black people murdered in Chicago being ignored by activists and protesters

December 04, 2014

The Glenn Beck Program

On the O’Reilly Factor last night, guest Tavis Smiley claimed “there is no respect for black life in this country,” in a rant against the grand jury decision in New York this week.

Glenn isn’t necessarily a fan of the decision, but he’s even less a fan of the narrative.

Are white cops the biggest threat to black people today?

The statistics and tragically long list of names of black people murdered in Chicago within the last few months tell a different story.

GLENN: All right. Black lives matter. He says, there's no respect. No one is paying attention and black lives matter. Let me give you a few names.

Rayvon Little, twenty years old. Chicago. Dead.

Andre Johnson, Jr., black, 29 years old, Chicago, dead.

Andrew Brown, 46, South Shore, Chicago, dead.

Doug Chambliss, black, 33, Chicago, dead.

Darrell Tolbert, 36, black, shot to death.

Gregory McKinney, black, shot to death.

Joseph Lewis, Chicago, black, shot to death.

Deon Gilbert, Jr., black, South Deering, Chicago, shot to death. By the way, he was 15.

Donnell Coakley, black, assault. Donnell was three.

Kyle Robertson, 23, black, Chicago, shot to death.

Lydell Lynch, black, 22, Grand Crossing, Chicago, shot to death.

Johnathan Cartwright, black, 18, shot to death.

Aaron Stalling, black, near west side Chicago, shot to death.

Remember, black lives matter.

Anthony Jackson, 22, Chicago, black, shot to death.

Zoraida Feliciano, black, Humbolt Park, Chicago, 33, shot to death.

Da'Lon Mobley, black, West Chicago, 30, shot to death.

Kendall Warren, black, 24, Chicago, shot to death.

Nacurvie Smith, 27 years old, Old Town Chicago, black, shot to death.

Larry Thomas, 31, Englewood, Chicago, black shot to death.

Robert Leverett, black, Englewood, Chicago, shot to death.

Derick Coopwood, black, 21, shot to death.

Krystal Jackson, 25, black, shot to death.

Tyris Ferguson, black, 23, shot to death.

David Kennedy, 24, Chicago Hyde Park, black, shot to death.

Jeffrey Daniels, black, 24, shot to death.

Ladarius Edwards, 23, black, Chicago, shot to death.

Jahakel Clark, 16, black, Marquette Park, Chicago, shot to death.

By the way, that's -- that's those who were killed in the month of November. Would you like me to give you the names —

PAT: I didn't hear Tavis mention any of them.

GLENN: Would you like me to give you the names for September because black lives matter?

There is no respect for black life in America anymore. You're right. And there's a growing condition that we don't respect any life anymore. In fact, we celebrate people who say, life is just too hard. I'm going to take my own life. We celebrate — we pay for people to take the lives of their babies because it's just going to be too hard to raise that baby. I want to live my life.

Black lives don't matter? No life matters anymore. But if you want to talk about black life, let's talk about — let's talk about how many white people have killed black people? How many black people have killed white people?

STU: And this is not, you know, to say that black people are bad. What it does say, is that there's not an epidemic of white people killing black people. 448 — this is 2011 according to the FBI, 448 whites were killed by blacks.

Approximate 193 blacks were killed by whites. That is 2.3 times more whites killed by blacks than the other way around despite the fact that there's six times as many whites in this country.

GLENN: Can we find out how many blacks killed blacks?

STU: We can. 193 blacks were killed by whites. 2,447 blacks were killed by blacks. 2,447 to 193.

GLENN: Give me again how many whites kill blacks and how many blacks kill blacks. How many whites killed blacks?

STU: 193.

GLENN: 193. Black people were killed by white people. 193 black people were killed by white people.

How many black people killed black people?

STU: 2,447.

GLENN: Is there an epidemic in America? Yeah, there's an epidemic in America, isn't there?

Nigell Vazquez. Twenty-two, black, Chicago. Shot to death.

Edward Davis, 23, black, Chicago, shot to death.

Martell Robinson, 20, shot to death.

In case you're keeping track at home. This is a whole new group of people.

Shaquille Holmes, 19 years old, black shot to death.

Decari Spivey, black, shot to death at 21.

54-year-old. He made it to 54. Malcolm Warnsby, 54.

Terry cook, 32 black shot to death.

Michael Wright, black 21, shot to death.

Michael Bloodson, 17, black, Chicago, shot to death.

Charles Labon, 28, black shot to death.

Tamica Riley, 37, black. Suffocation.

Christopher McGee, black, shot to death.

Kawantis Montgomery 19, black shot to death.

Devonshay Lofton, 17, black shot to death.

Kamaal Burton. 18, black, shot to death.

Dimitre Beck, 21, black stabbed to death.

Leon Austin, black stabbed to death.

Markise M. Darling, 19, shot to death.

Cortez river, black 16, shot to death.

Davontae Harrison, 21. Black shot to death.

Mondele Heard. 20 shot to death.

Arthur Hearn, 88, died from assault. Chicago.

Deandre Ellis black shot to death.

Malachi Baldwin, 27, black shot to death.

Leroyce Noel, 20 shot to death.

Stanley Macon Jr., 25, shot to death.

Camerion Blair, 16, shot to death.

Shandel Adams, 25, black shot to death.

Demureya Macon, 13, Chicago, shot to death.

PAT: What was that?

GLENN: That was September.

You want to talk about an epidemic? You want to talk about black lives not mattering?

Stu, how many white people killed black people last year?

STU: 2011, 448 whites were killed by blacks. 193 blacks were killed by whites.

GLENN: How many blacks killed blacks?

STU: 2,447.

GLENN: Those are the numbers.

America, I know that we're suffering from Common Core math, but those numbers — when you have to use a little arrow sign which is bigger — which is a greater number than the other, it's pretty damn clear even when you're using Common Core math.

STU: 91 percent of black people were killed by black people in this particular year. 91 percent.

GLENN: What do you say we actually talk about reconciliation? What do you say we stop listening to the clerics like Al Sharpton. The people who are just using their religion for their own power. What do you say we stop listening to the communists, the anarchists, or anybody else, that has an agenda other than saying all life matters. Why does black life only matter? Why does old life or 20-something or children's lives or American lives.

What do you say all lives matter, and we try to fix that. To do that, however, we'll have to start asking each other really honest questions: What the hell is going on in the inner cities. Where's Al Sharpton there inspect anybody who is honest would be there every weekend. Don't talk to me about — don't talk to me about something we agree on. The grand jury appears to be wrong in New York. Let's figure that one out and let's do that one together.

Continuation of the names:

GLENN: Just looking at the names of people that have -- the names of the people -- black lives matter, the names of the people killed on the streets of Chicago, just in the last couple of months.

James Watson, 61 years old, black, shot.

It amazes me how many people were shot in a town where guns are illegal.

Raymond Murray, 25, black, shot, South Shore, Chicago.

STU: Devin Pope, age 23, race: black, South Shore of Chicago. August.

GLENN: Tony MacIntosh, 20, black, shot, Chicago.

PAT: Denero Appleton, thirty-one, black shot, South Deering, Chicago.

Donald Williams, seventeen, black, shot, Austin neighborhood of Chicago.

GLENN: Hezekiah Harper-Bey, 20, black, shot, West Garfield Park, Chicago.

STU: Brian Davis, age 33, black, shooting, West Garfield Park, Chicago.

Jerome Harris, 17 years, black, shot, Morgan Park, Chicago.

GLENN: Unknown 21-year-old, black, shot, Gage Park, Chicago.

PAT: Erik Kall, 27, black, shot, Chicago lawn.

Darrien Jordan, 21 years old, black, shot. North Lawndale, Chicago.

GLENN: Remember, black lives matter.

JEFFY: Lafayette Walton, 16 years old, West Humboldt, Chicago.

Dakari Pargo, 19 years old, shot, West Englewood.

GLENN: Black lives matter.

STU: Martrell Ross, thirty-two years old, black, shot, River North.

Gabriel Stevens, 39 years old, black, shot, Auburn Gresham.

GLENN: Torrente G. Pickens, black, 37, shot, Chicago.

PAT: Ronald Holliman, 18 years old, black, shot, South Austin, Chicago.

Derrick Bowens, 27 years old, black, shot, Englewood, Chicago.

GLENN: Jackie Roberson. 22. Black. Shot. Chicago.

Billy Washington. 37. Black, shot, Chicago.

Larry Lee, 52, black, shot, Chicago.

Damani Chenier, 23, black, stabbed to death, Chicago.

Do black lives matter? Al Sharpton, do black lives matter? Mr. President, do black lives matter? Why are we marching in the streets? Black lives matter. Right?

Raddy Comer, 20, black, shot, Chicago.

Eddie Taylor, 22, black, shot, Chicago.

STU: Vincente Obregon, twenty-one years, black, shot, Marquette Park.

Darryl Allison, twenty-six, black, shot, Chicago.

Kashif Tillis, 29, black, shot, Chicago.

PAT: Alante Vallejo, 18 years old, black, shot, Rogers Park, Chicago.

Carnesha Fort, 22 years old, black, Chicago.

Brian Weekly, 18 years old, black, shot, Washington Park, Chicago.

Kennyone Pendleton, black, shot, Chicago.

GLENN: Black lives matter. Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, the media, anarchists, communists, Mr. President, black lives matter.

JEFFY: Jimero Starling, 19 years old, shot, Humboldt.

ShAmbreyh Barfield, 21 years old, black, shot, West Garfield Park.

STU: Jeremiah Shaw, 19, black, shot, Chicago.

Jabari Scurlock, 16 years, black, shot, Chicago.

Arnold Dearies is 26. Black, shot, Chicago.

GLENN: Alexander Smith, 25, black, shot, Chicago.

Rodney Wilson, 30, black, stabbed to death, Chicago.

Genorel Martin, black, shot to death, Chicago.

Travis Wright, 21, black, shot, Chicago.

PAT: Laquisha Hickman, 35, black, shot, Ashburn, Chicago.

Nykole Loving, 23 years old, black, Ashburn, Chicago.

Paris Brown, 21, black, shot, Grand Crossing, Chicago.

STU: Devonte Carthan, 17 years old, black, shot, Chicago.

Julio Perkins, 30 years old, black, shot, Chicago.

LaDarryl Walters, 23 years old, black, shot, Chicago.

GLENN: By the way, these are a four-month period. I'm only about halfway through my list.

Reginald Boston, forty-four, black, stabbed to death.

Stanley Bobo, 18, shot, Chicago.

Tepete Davis, black, 42, shot to death, Chicago.

Charles Wright, 39, shot to death, black, back of the yards, Chicago.

Denzell Franklin, 23, black, shot to death, Chicago.

Mr. President, black lives matter. If that's true. Let's stop the hype. Let's stop the propaganda and let's go where people are being shot to death.

PAT: Where there is really an epidemic.

JEFFY: Corey Hudson, 34 years old, black shot, West Englewood.

Robert Cotton, 35 years old, black, shot, West Englewood.

PAT: Brett Ewing, 26 years old, shooting, black.

Damian Williams, 22 years old, black, died of a shooting in Austin, part of Chicago.

Dewey Knox, 27, black, shot to death, Chicago.

Brandon Peterson, 17, died of shooting, black, East Garfield Park, Chicago.

GLENN: David Morgan, 36, black, part of Chicago, shot to death.

Marc Williams, 17, black, shot to death, South Chicago.

Bobby Moore, 25, black, South Chicago.

Darryl Owens Jr., black, 34, shot to death, Chatham.

STU: Walter Neely, shot, 25 years old, black, Chicago.

Shaquise Butler, 16 years old, black, shot, Chicago.

Amy Holmes-Sterling, 29 years old, black, shot, Chicago.

Karveon Glover, 16 years old, black, shot, Chicago.

PAT: Louis Winn, age 22, black, died of a stabbing in Washington Heights, Chicago.

Daniel Jones, 26 years old, black, shot, West Garfield Park, Chicago.

Damarcus Boswell, 18, black, Marquette Park, Chicago.

JEFFY: Shaquille Ross, 18 years old, black, shot, West Englewood, Chicago.

Donald Ray, 21 years old, black, shot, South Austin, Chicago.

Kezon Lamb, 20 years old, Chicago, shot.

GLENN: Oduro Yeboah, 22, black, shot, Uptown.

Owen Spears, 22, black, Humboldt Park, Chicago, shot to death.

Pierre Peters, 41, black, shot to death, South Austin, Chicago.

STU: Joel Wade, black, 20 years old, shot, Chicago.

Seadl Commings, 27 years old, black, shot, Chicago.

Dorval Jenkins, 19 years old, black, shot, Chicago.

PAT: 15-year-old Dekarlos Scott, black, Rosslyn Park, Chicago.

GLENN: Mr. President, may I ask a question, could any of these young men have been your son? Any of — any of these young men? Did they look like they could be your son?

Al Sharpton, is there any injustice happening here? Is there any epidemic going on here? Where are you, Al Sharpton? Why aren't you -- why aren't you encouraging people to burn down the convenience stores in Chicago? Why aren't people protesting in the streets of Chicago and turning over cars — not police cars, because this is mainly black-on-black crime in Chicago. No cops involved here. These are just kids killing kids with illegal guns.

You want to talk about oppression, you want to talk about slavery, slavery exists. It exists in the inner city where you're a slave to crime. You can't get your kids out because of the crime. You worry about your kids as they go out. Don't get shot in the front lawn. You don't even have to be doing anything wrong. Three years old, shot to death, front lawn. 14-year-old shot from inside the house even though the fighting was happening outside the house.

Where is the justice? Where is the peace? Where are the marches? Where are the civil rights activists? Where are people saying take control of your own damn life? Where is the president on this one? Why are we lumping people together and saying that — as Tavis Smiley did on Bill O'Reilly, giving five names and lumping the real, what appears to me, to be injustice in New York.

That is injustice.

EXPOSED: Why Eisenhower warned us about endless wars

PAUL J. RICHARDS / Staff | Getty Images

Donald Trump emphasizes peace through strength, reminding the world that the United States is willing to fight to win. That’s beyond ‘defense.’

President Donald Trump made headlines this week by signaling a rebrand of the Defense Department — restoring its original name, the Department of War.

At first, I was skeptical. “Defense” suggests restraint, a principle I consider vital to U.S. foreign policy. “War” suggests aggression. But for the first 158 years of the republic, that was the honest name: the Department of War.

A Department of War recognizes the truth: The military exists to fight and, if necessary, to win decisively.

The founders never intended a permanent standing army. When conflict came — the Revolution, the War of 1812, the trenches of France, the beaches of Normandy — the nation called men to arms, fought, and then sent them home. Each campaign was temporary, targeted, and necessary.

From ‘war’ to ‘military-industrial complex’

Everything changed in 1947. President Harry Truman — facing the new reality of nuclear weapons, global tension, and two world wars within 20 years — established a full-time military and rebranded the Department of War as the Department of Defense. Americans resisted; we had never wanted a permanent army. But Truman convinced the country it was necessary.

Was the name change an early form of political correctness? A way to soften America’s image as a global aggressor? Or was it simply practical? Regardless, the move created a permanent, professional military. But it also set the stage for something Truman’s successor, President Dwight “Ike” Eisenhower, famously warned about: the military-industrial complex.

Ike, the five-star general who commanded Allied forces in World War II and stormed Normandy, delivered a harrowing warning during his farewell address: The military-industrial complex would grow powerful. Left unchecked, it could influence policy and push the nation toward unnecessary wars.

And that’s exactly what happened. The Department of Defense, with its full-time and permanent army, began spending like there was no tomorrow. Weapons were developed, deployed, and sometimes used simply to justify their existence.

Peace through strength

When Donald Trump said this week, “I don’t want to be defense only. We want defense, but we want offense too,” some people freaked out. They called him a warmonger. He isn’t. Trump is channeling a principle older than him: peace through strength. Ronald Reagan preached it; Trump is taking it a step further.

Just this week, Trump also suggested limiting nuclear missiles — hardly the considerations of a warmonger — echoing Reagan, who wanted to remove missiles from silos while keeping them deployable on planes.

The seemingly contradictory move of Trump calling for a Department of War sends a clear message: He wants Americans to recognize that our military exists not just for defense, but to project power when necessary.

Trump has pointed to something critically important: The best way to prevent war is to have a leader who knows exactly who he is and what he will do. Trump signals strength, deterrence, and resolve. You want to negotiate? Great. You don’t? Then we’ll finish the fight decisively.

That’s why the world listens to us. That’s why nations come to the table — not because Trump is reckless, but because he means what he says and says what he means. Peace under weakness invites aggression. Peace under strength commands respect.

Trump is the most anti-war president we’ve had since Jimmy Carter. But unlike Carter, Trump isn’t weak. Carter’s indecision emboldened enemies and made the world less safe. Trump’s strength makes the country stronger. He believes in peace as much as any president. But he knows peace requires readiness for war.

Names matter

When we think of “defense,” we imagine cybersecurity, spy programs, and missile shields. But when we think of “war,” we recall its harsh reality: death, destruction, and national survival. Trump is reminding us what the Department of Defense is really for: war. Not nation-building, not diplomacy disguised as military action, not endless training missions. War — full stop.

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

Names matter. Words matter. They shape identity and character. A Department of Defense implies passivity, a posture of reaction. A Department of War recognizes the truth: The military exists to fight and, if necessary, to win decisively.

So yes, I’ve changed my mind. I’m for the rebranding to the Department of War. It shows strength to the world. It reminds Americans, internally and externally, of the reality we face. The Department of Defense can no longer be a euphemism. Our military exists for war — not without deterrence, but not without strength either. And we need to stop deluding ourselves.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Unveiling the Deep State: From surveillance to censorship

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

From surveillance abuse to censorship, the deep state used state power and private institutions to suppress dissent and influence two US elections.

The term “deep state” has long been dismissed as the province of cranks and conspiracists. But the recent declassification of two critical documents — the Durham annex, released by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), and a report publicized by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard — has rendered further denial untenable.

These documents lay bare the structure and function of a bureaucratic, semi-autonomous network of agencies, contractors, nonprofits, and media entities that together constitute a parallel government operating alongside — and at times in opposition to — the duly elected one.

The ‘deep state’ is a self-reinforcing institutional machine — a decentralized, global bureaucracy whose members share ideological alignment.

The disclosures do not merely recount past abuses; they offer a schematic of how modern influence operations are conceived, coordinated, and deployed across domestic and international domains.

What they reveal is not a rogue element operating in secret, but a systematized apparatus capable of shaping elections, suppressing dissent, and laundering narratives through a transnational network of intelligence, academia, media, and philanthropic institutions.

Narrative engineering from the top

According to Gabbard’s report, a pivotal moment occurred on December 9, 2016, when the Obama White House convened its national security leadership in the Situation Room. Attendees included CIA Director John Brennan, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, National Security Agency Director Michael Rogers, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Secretary of State John Kerry, and others.

During this meeting, the consensus view up to that point — that Russia had not manipulated the election outcome — was subordinated to new instructions.

The record states plainly: The intelligence community was directed to prepare an assessment “per the President’s request” that would frame Russia as the aggressor and then-presidential candidate Donald Trump as its preferred candidate. Notably absent was any claim that new intelligence had emerged. The motivation was political, not evidentiary.

This maneuver became the foundation for the now-discredited 2017 intelligence community assessment on Russian election interference. From that point on, U.S. intelligence agencies became not neutral evaluators of fact but active participants in constructing a public narrative designed to delegitimize the incoming administration.

Institutional and media coordination

The ODNI report and the Durham annex jointly describe a feedback loop in which intelligence is laundered through think tanks and nongovernmental organizations, then cited by media outlets as “independent verification.” At the center of this loop are agencies like the CIA, FBI, and ODNI; law firms such as Perkins Coie; and NGOs such as the Open Society Foundations.

According to the Durham annex, think tanks including the Atlantic Council, the Carnegie Endowment, and the Center for a New American Security were allegedly informed of Clinton’s 2016 plan to link Trump to Russia. These institutions, operating under the veneer of academic independence, helped diffuse the narrative into public discourse.

Media coordination was not incidental. On the very day of the aforementioned White House meeting, the Washington Post published a front-page article headlined “Obama Orders Review of Russian Hacking During Presidential Campaign” — a story that mirrored the internal shift in official narrative. The article marked the beginning of a coordinated media campaign that would amplify the Trump-Russia collusion narrative throughout the transition period.

Surveillance and suppression

Surveillance, once limited to foreign intelligence operations, was turned inward through the abuse of FISA warrants. The Steele dossier — funded by the Clinton campaign via Perkins Coie and Fusion GPS — served as the basis for wiretaps on Trump affiliates, despite being unverified and partially discredited. The FBI even altered emails to facilitate the warrants.

ROBYN BECK / Contributor | Getty Images

This capacity for internal subversion reappeared in 2020, when 51 former intelligence officials signed a letter labeling the Hunter Biden laptop story as “Russian disinformation.” According to polling, 79% of Americans believed truthful coverage of the laptop could have altered the election. The suppression of that story — now confirmed as authentic — was election interference, pure and simple.

A machine, not a ‘conspiracy theory’

The deep state is a self-reinforcing institutional machine — a decentralized, global bureaucracy whose members share ideological alignment and strategic goals.

Each node — law firms, think tanks, newsrooms, federal agencies — operates with plausible deniability. But taken together, they form a matrix of influence capable of undermining electoral legitimacy and redirecting national policy without democratic input.

The ODNI report and the Durham annex mark the first crack in the firewall shielding this machine. They expose more than a political scandal buried in the past. They lay bare a living system of elite coordination — one that demands exposure, confrontation, and ultimately dismantling.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Trump's proposal explained: Ukraine's path to peace without NATO expansion

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / Contributor | Getty Images

Strategic compromise, not absolute victory, often ensures lasting stability.

When has any country been asked to give up land it won in a war? Even if a nation is at fault, the punishment must be measured.

After World War I, Germany, the main aggressor, faced harsh penalties under the Treaty of Versailles. Germans resented the restrictions, and that resentment fueled the rise of Adolf Hitler, ultimately leading to World War II. History teaches that justice for transgressions must avoid creating conditions for future conflict.

Ukraine and Russia must choose to either continue the cycle of bloodshed or make difficult compromises in pursuit of survival and stability.

Russia and Ukraine now stand at a similar crossroads. They can cling to disputed land and prolong a devastating war, or they can make concessions that might secure a lasting peace. The stakes could not be higher: Tens of thousands die each month, and the choice between endless bloodshed and negotiated stability hinges on each side’s willingness to yield.

History offers a guide. In 1967, Israel faced annihilation. Surrounded by hostile armies, the nation fought back and seized large swaths of territory from Jordan, Egypt, and Syria. Yet Israel did not seek an empire. It held only the buffer zones needed for survival and returned most of the land. Security and peace, not conquest, drove its decisions.

Peace requires concessions

Secretary of State Marco Rubio says both Russia and Ukraine will need to “get something” from a peace deal. He’s right. Israel proved that survival outweighs pride. By giving up land in exchange for recognition and an end to hostilities, it stopped the cycle of war. Egypt and Israel have not fought in more than 50 years.

Russia and Ukraine now press opposing security demands. Moscow wants a buffer to block NATO. Kyiv, scarred by invasion, seeks NATO membership — a pledge that any attack would trigger collective defense by the United States and Europe.

President Donald Trump and his allies have floated a middle path: an Article 5-style guarantee without full NATO membership. Article 5, the core of NATO’s charter, declares that an attack on one is an attack on all. For Ukraine, such a pledge would act as a powerful deterrent. For Russia, it might be more palatable than NATO expansion to its border

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

Peace requires concessions. The human cost is staggering: U.S. estimates indicate 20,000 Russian soldiers died in a single month — nearly half the total U.S. casualties in Vietnam — and the toll on Ukrainians is also severe. To stop this bloodshed, both sides need to recognize reality on the ground, make difficult choices, and anchor negotiations in security and peace rather than pride.

Peace or bloodshed?

Both Russia and Ukraine claim deep historical grievances. Ukraine arguably has a stronger claim of injustice. But the question is not whose parchment is older or whose deed is more valid. The question is whether either side is willing to trade some land for the lives of thousands of innocent people. True security, not historical vindication, must guide the path forward.

History shows that punitive measures or rigid insistence on territorial claims can perpetuate cycles of war. Germany’s punishment after World War I contributed directly to World War II. By contrast, Israel’s willingness to cede land for security and recognition created enduring peace. Ukraine and Russia now face the same choice: Continue the cycle of bloodshed or make difficult compromises in pursuit of survival and stability.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

The loneliness epidemic: Are machines replacing human connection?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

Seniors, children, and the isolated increasingly rely on machines for conversation, risking real relationships and the emotional depth that only humans provide.

Jill Smola is 75 years old. She’s a retiree from Orlando, Florida, and she spent her life caring for the elderly. She played games, assembled puzzles, and offered company to those who otherwise would have sat alone.

Now, she sits alone herself. Her husband has died. She has a lung condition. She can’t drive. She can’t leave her home. Weeks can pass without human interaction.

Loneliness is an epidemic. And AI will not fix it. It will only dull the edges and make a diminished life tolerable.

But CBS News reports that she has a new companion. And she likes this companion more than her own daughter.

The companion? Artificial intelligence.

She spends five hours a day talking to her AI friend. They play games, do trivia, and just talk. She says she even prefers it to real people.

My first thought was simple: Stop this. We are losing our humanity.

But as I sat with the story, I realized something uncomfortable. Maybe we’ve already lost some of our humanity — not to AI, but to ourselves.

Outsourcing presence

How often do we know the right thing to do yet fail to act? We know we should visit the lonely. We know we should sit with someone in pain. We know what Jesus would do: Notice the forgotten, touch the untouchable, offer time and attention without outsourcing compassion.

Yet how often do we just … talk about it? On the radio, online, in lectures, in posts. We pontificate, and then we retreat.

I asked myself: What am I actually doing to close the distance between knowing and doing?

Human connection is messy. It’s inconvenient. It takes patience, humility, and endurance. AI doesn’t challenge you. It doesn’t interrupt your day. It doesn’t ask anything of you. Real people do. Real people make us confront our pride, our discomfort, our loneliness.

We’ve built an economy of convenience. We can have groceries delivered, movies streamed, answers instantly. But friendships — real relationships — are slow, inefficient, unpredictable. They happen in the blank spaces of life that we’ve been trained to ignore.

And now we’re replacing that inefficiency with machines.

AI provides comfort without challenge. It eliminates the risk of real intimacy. It’s an elegant coping mechanism for loneliness, but a poor substitute for life. If we’re not careful, the lonely won’t just be alone — they’ll be alone with an anesthetic, a shadow that never asks for anything, never interrupts, never makes them grow.

Reclaiming our humanity

We need to reclaim our humanity. Presence matters. Not theory. Not outrage. Action.

It starts small. Pull up a chair for someone who eats alone. Call a neighbor you haven’t spoken to in months. Visit a nursing home once a month — then once a week. Ask their names, hear their stories. Teach your children how to be present, to sit with someone in grief, without rushing to fix it.

Turn phones off at dinner. Make Sunday afternoons human time. Listen. Ask questions. Don’t post about it afterward. Make the act itself sacred.

Humility is central. We prefer machines because we can control them. Real people are inconvenient. They interrupt our narratives. They demand patience, forgiveness, and endurance. They make us confront ourselves.

A friend will challenge your self-image. A chatbot won’t.

Our homes are quieter. Our streets are emptier. Loneliness is an epidemic. And AI will not fix it. It will only dull the edges and make a diminished life tolerable.

Before we worry about how AI will reshape humanity, we must first practice humanity. It can start with 15 minutes a day of undivided attention, presence, and listening.

Change usually comes when pain finally wins. Let’s not wait for that. Let’s start now. Because real connection restores faster than any machine ever will.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn's Show Prep

Do black lives really matter? Glenn reads the stunning list of black people murdered in Chicago being ignored by activists and protesters

EXPOSED: Why Eisenhower warned us about endless wars

Donald Trump emphasizes peace through strength, reminding the world that the United States is willing to fight to win. That’s beyond ‘defense.’

A Department of War recognizes the truth: The military exists to fight and, if necessary, to win decisively.

From ‘war’ to ‘military-industrial complex’

Peace through strength

Names matter

Unveiling the Deep State: From surveillance to censorship

From surveillance abuse to censorship, the deep state used state power and private institutions to suppress dissent and influence two US elections.

Narrative engineering from the top

Institutional and media coordination

Surveillance and suppression

A machine, not a ‘conspiracy theory’

Trump's proposal explained: Ukraine's path to peace without NATO expansion

Strategic compromise, not absolute victory, often ensures lasting stability.

Ukraine and Russia must choose to either continue the cycle of bloodshed or make difficult compromises in pursuit of survival and stability.

Peace requires concessions

Peace or bloodshed?

The loneliness epidemic: Are machines replacing human connection?

Seniors, children, and the isolated increasingly rely on machines for conversation, risking real relationships and the emotional depth that only humans provide.

Loneliness is an epidemic. And AI will not fix it. It will only dull the edges and make a diminished life tolerable.

Outsourcing presence

Reclaiming our humanity