Glenn Beck Makes First Ever Presidential Endorsement for Ted Cruz

In nearly 40 years of broadcasting, Glenn Beck has never officially endorsed any presidential candidate. Not that he's never been asked. He has, many times. But he's never trusted anyone enough — until now.

Beck made the unprecedented announcement on the campaign trail today during a rally at Faith Bible College in Ankeny, Iowa.

"We need a new George Washington," Beck said. "Today’s Washington will not be found in the garish light of gold, but rather, in the bold service of a man who stands tirelessly for what he deeply believes — that government should be of the people, by the people, and for the people. That is why I am endorsing Senator Ted Cruz as the next President of the United States of America.”

In addition to Glenn Beck, the rally, sponsored by Keep The Promise, featured special guest Senator Ted Cruz, Congressman Steve King, Bob Vander Plaats of The Family Leader, and David Barton of Wallbuilders.

With the country at a pivotal crossroads, Beck emphasized how critical it is to put the United States back on the right track and reconnect with what made America exceptional.

"America’s presidency is more than just an office, bigger than just a man. The presidency is about the principles of life, liberty, and justice for all. I stand for those principles, and we must elect a president who stands for them," Beck said.

Beck also highlighted Cruz's many accomplishments — from winning landmark court cases to standing on principles grounded by the U.S. Constitution. Cruz, the son of a Cuban immigrant, was fed the Constitution as a child and raised on the solid Judeo-Christian principles that founded the United States of America.

"I have prayed for the next George Washington," Beck said, "I believe I have found him."

Watch Glenn and Sen. Cruz at the rally in Waterloo.

 

Rally Photos From Glenn's Instagram

 

Related Articles

Beck Joins 21 Leaders in Unprecedented ‘National Review’ Editorial

National Review: Donald Trump is a Menace to American Conservatism

Two Tweets About Sarah Palin Which Is Presidential

There's No Carrying Water for Ted Cruz

Ted Cruz Promises Silver Lining to Obama's Executive Orders

Glenn: Ted Cruz Was Raised to Be President

 

Featured Image: Ted Cruz and Glenn Beck on The Glenn Beck Program

Below is a rush transcript of Glenn's speech, it might contain errors.

What brings us here today?

Not a man.

But a simple belief that things can be better.

That it doesn't need to be this hard,

And that our children do have hope of a better tomorrow than our yesterdays.

No president can give us that.

Nor can any president snuff out that flame.

It is the essence of America.

It is what those who yearn for our shores feel.

Those who are locked in some Iranian jail hope for.

And what those in the slave shops of China can only dream of.

Our country is in trouble and we stand at the crossroads.

To put ourselves back on the right track we need to reconnect with what got us here.

Many of you have been with me for a while.

You watched me at Fox and we learned the good bad and ugly about our history together,

We stood shoulder to shoulder on a beautiful August day at the feet of Abraham Lincoln.

We prayed together for God to help us

find a leader or patriot that could be the next George Washington.

Honestly, when we were in Washington and since,

I had given up hope.

I thought we would have to raise him or her from childhood

and it would be thirty-five years before we would meet them.

The press seems to think that I am here to endorse Ted Cruz today.

In my almost 40 years of broadcast I have never endorsed anyone.

For years it wouldn't have mattered

And for the rest,

I didn't trust the men who asked.

I am still not sure that my endorsement would matter,

But I am here today to talk to you about American principles.

We spoke of them many days while at Fox.

Faith - hope and charity.

Let's start with faith.

First, Faith in God.

Real faith.

Not showman faith.

Living the principles of faith,

not just reading about them in 2nd Corinthians.

But actually living them.

But by their fruits shall he know them.

So as we decide who should lead us we should ask:

What are the fruits of these candidates?

Does your candidate have a record of

Standing for your right to worship God,

Winning the court cases to keep the Ten Commandments

Winning the Heller case so you can defend yourself.

And going against his own president, George Bush

to make sure that an illegal alien

who brutally gang raped and killed

got the death penalty he deserved?

Has your candidate served his whole life

trying to make sure you hold on to the rights

God endowed you with?

The George Washington we need today will not be found in the garish light of gold.

But rather, in the bold service of a man who stands tirelessly for what he deeply believes.

Where does your candidate find his treasure?

Casinos or The Constitution?

But there is another kind of faith we must look for.

I heard The Donald say that "I will make America great again.”

But this is not true. And Donald can’t make it true.

No, one man makes America great.

But each of us as individuals, living our own lives - believing in our own strengths -

that makes America great.

That is faith in self.

We have already had a president tell us

"you didn't build that”

And try to convince us that he and the power of his office were responsible for what we had accomplished.

But, the President does not create jobs.

He helps create the conditions to where WE THE PEOPLE can create jobs and change lives.

The next president cannot be a repeat of Obama

who thought he could make the seas recede by a stroke of his pen,

or that he was worthy of the peace prize because of his name.

This president must be a servant of God, and the people.

He must have less faith in himself, his pen or his phone

and more real faith in our God,

our principles

and our people.

The next principle is Hope.

Hope comes from truth.

Cancer patients all say the same thing to their doctors: please, shoot straight.

Tell me the truth.

Well I will.

The country has a deep and metastasized cancer.

It is called, political correctness, cronyism, and progressivism.

It is stage four and this may be our last shot.

We are lying to ourselves and accepting lies from our politicians.

Let's be clear.

Hillary Clinton should be in jail.

Because if you or I did what she has admitted to doing we would be in prison and deservedly so. For the rest of us, “Oops, I’m sorry” doesn’t dismiss felonies.

We must not continue to lower the bar.

Nor accept lies because they are convenient or easy.

We must do the right thing even at our own expense.

And that means telling the truth.

About our situation with jobs,

The rigged game of cronyism,

Race

Isis,

Our families

And ourselves.

The hard truth.

Many here know my history.

I am an alcoholic who lost everything and almost lost his family.

You know that not because someone exposed it.

But because I told you.

If we don't tell each other the truth we cannot grow.

I understand pivot points.

Changing your mind, your position, even your heart.

I believe in redemption.

Hope of the world comes from not the mistakes but the ability to admit them,

ask forgiveness

and change your ways.

There are many great candidates in this race

but we must admit it,

this is a two person race.

And the other guy has said that he has never felt that he has done anything to ask God’s forgiveness. The hubris of that thinking is incredible to me. As if the last 8 years of an egomaniac in the White House has taught us nothing.

I cannot judge his soul.

But As citizens we are required to judge his record,

His record is clear: He has been a life long progressive, and now he claims to be conservative.

Where was his pivot point?

He could tell us the story on what happened in his life to suddenly change almost every principle he held his entire life –

The principles that have guided his actions for over 60 years.

Perhaps he really doesn’t need God’s forgiveness

but how about asking America’s forgiveness for supporting trillions in Wall Street bailouts,

and calling for the nationalization of banks.

How about asking for forgiveness for giving money to prop up Anthony Wiener,

Nancy Pelosi,

Rahm Emanuel

Mitch Mc Conell

and Harry Reid.

Hope comes from honesty.

We need a man who will tell us the truth and then take actions based on those truths.

Finally, Charity.

This is a fundamental principle.

The world knows that we are the most charitable nation in the history of mankind.

We have forgotten.

We do need a Safety net - for the few who truly need it.

And we must keep those promises that we have made, like those to our veterans.

They did their job.

Now we must do ours

and help them heal and become whole

without a lot of government red tape.

We made them fight for our freedom with one hand tied behind their back,

there should be no foolish rules of engagement at the hospital.

We can do this by getting the government out of the way.

By allowing medical professionals

and private institutions to do what they are supposed to do.

But we must do more ourselves.

The days of walking by the homeless,

the alcoholic,

out of work,

the orphan

with out really seeing them, must end.

We must talk less of our rights and more about our own personal responsibility.

The Good Samaritan didn't call the government.

He picked him up, paid for his stay and helped him back on his feet.

Government isn't the solution, it is the problem.

WE THE PEOPLE ARE THE SOLUTION.

But that means all of us.

Charity must not be used as a tool to simply take the bread from another's work because you do not wish to work.

This means that this misguided compassion must end.

FDR said that when you take away a man’s ability to work you take away his self-worth.

The government dole must end,

not simply because we can no longer afford it

but because it violates our principles.

By strengthening people

and encouraging to them do what they can

and must do for themselves,

they become strong and engaged citizens.

WITH FAITH AND HOPE IN A BETTER FUTURE.

And let's not forget that Charity begins at home.

If we do not get a hold of our borders

and who is here

we will not be able to be the life boat for those who truly need it..

All those who wish to do us harm

and those who are willing to bleed us dry

must be sent home.

But we must not forget those who want to become an American

like Ted’s father.

And because charity is a virtue that we hold up as foundational,

we must not forget the Christians that are being crucified,

tortured

and whose children are being raped

and sold off as slaves for Isis. They

need a home and our principles demand that we find ways to help them.

Most of all

we need to be more charitable toward each other.

We are at each other's throats.

We are not the enemy.

Just because we disagree does not make us sell outs or Traitors

Or as a few extremists called Mark Levin for his defense of Ted Cruz "a dirty Jew".

We are Americans who share many of the same hopes and dreams.

And if what we are fighting for is rooted deeply in our principles, then

We just disagree on how to get there,

Through progressivism

Or constitutionalism. Through Tyranny or through Liberty?

I believe what allowed us to be great in the first place was our constitution.

We were a nation of laws and not of men.

The next president is going to choose up to four Supreme Court Justices.

So much of what is decided is five to four.

With the wrong president those decisions could be 8-1.

The freedom of each man and woman and child is codified into laws protected by the Constitution.

It is time to be the men and women we were born to be.

Because this is our time

And history is being written.

Will we be the first in human history

To turn around

Remember and embrace again what made us great in the first place?

Americas values,

Her principles

And her people.

I told Cruz I would be his worst nightmare if he didn't do what he said he would.

It’s hard to stand alone.

But in America we love the David and Goliath story.

We root for the little guy, alone and out gunned.

Our choice is clear

will we stand with the bully who buys his favors and destroys, smears and uses every Saul Alinsky tactic to get his way

or with the little guy who still believes that someone who plays by the rules and works hard wins in the end.

Some one who still believes in divine providence and that if you just stand where the Lord asks,

even if his face in the end is marred with sweat,

tears or blood, it is not He that makes America great again,

but we the people,

unleashed and free to create,

dream,

work.

America cannot last with another four years of division,

hatred, backroom deal-making

and enemies lists.

We are better than this and we must not compromise who we are.

The next president could be Lincoln.

He could be Washington and refound our country. Restore our principals. Liberty. Freedom. Justice for all.

Who is that man?

I believe that man is Ted Cruz.

Use this compass so your path remains true

while they are slinging mud and losing their way

You will not.

Over the last 4 months, I have wanted one of the debate moderators to ask the candidates "

Please recite the oath of office, and tell me what that means to you"

The oath of office of the President of the United States is to "Preserve, Protect and Defend the Constitution of the United States

There is a reason that is the Oath.

BECAUSE THAT IS THE JOB.

The oath doesn't say "I'll put a chicken in every pot"

or "I'll restrict the sale of pornography" or "I'll declare a war on poverty, drugs and warm weather"

or "I'll make the rich pay their fair share".

All government employees take an oath saying they’ll defend the Constitution

from both external and internal enemies

Those are our principles

And that is the president’s job.

I am not here just to endorse these principles which we find self-evident,

but to tell you that this one time the press has it right.

I have finally found a man who actually believes and lives these principles.

That is why.

I am officially endorsing Ted Cruz

to become the first Hispanic president,

the first true Conservative President since Reagan

and the next president of the United States

Ted Cruz.

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.

Censorship, spying, lies—The Deep State’s web finally unmasked

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.