Ted Cruz: The Four-Part Series

In a four-part series for radio, Glenn tells the life story of presidential candidate Ted Cruz --- from his early upbringing by immigrant parents to his courageous leadership today. Known for tenaciously standing up to establishment power brokers in Washington --- on both sides --- and the media, Cruz has done so with both honor and class. Ted Cruz is, in Glenn's words, the George Washington we've been praying for, born at this time for a reason --- to become president of the United States.

The four-part series is compiled below for your convenience.

Part I: The Early Years

Raised by an American mother and a Cuban immigrant father, Cruz was taught to love the United States and revere the Constitution. From an early age, he learned important lessons from both of his parents, including discipline and hard work. His father --- Rafael Cruz --- fought in the Cuban revolution, and was imprisoned and tortured. After fleeing to Texas in 1957, penniless and not speaking a word of English, Rafael washed dishes for 50 cents an hour to pay his way through the University of Texas.

When Ted was eight years old, he went to a summer camp and accepted Christ in his life. Early on, it became apparent that Ted was more than average. He was brilliant --- and destined for something big.

When he was 15, Ted Cruz was one of five Houston kids selected by the Free Enterprise Institute to tour the country and speak about the Constitution. Prior to graduating high school, Ted had delivered 80 speeches on such topics as economics, the Austrian economist von Mises, and the importance and meaning of the Constitution.

Ted's decision to attend an Ivy League school was not received well by his parents. They were struggling financially. To make his dream a reality, it would mean scholarships, students loans and working two jobs. Additionally, his father was concern the liberal environment would tarnish his son's beliefs.

"Ted, you're growing into a good, strong man," Cruz's father said to him. "Are you going to be strong enough to go to an Ivy League school and hold on to your principles and values?"

Ted assured him he could and was accepted into Princeton University. He later attended Harvard Law School.

Subsequent years at Princeton University and Harvard Law School would uniquely prepare Ted to be leader of the free world. They would also put him on a collision course with some of the most powerful people in the world --- including the president of the United States.

Part II: The College Years

As his high school's valedictorian, Ted had the opportunity to visit several campuses while scouting out colleges. He dreamed of attending an Ivy League school and visited esteemed campuses like Harvard, MIT and Dartmouth. He realized his dream when he was accepted to Princeton University.

Paying for an Ivy League education wasn't easy, though. His family was struggling financially so it required earning scholarships, taking out student loans and working two jobs --- no government bailouts for this constitutional conservative.

During his freshman year, Ted realized that being a principled conservative in a liberal environment would be challenging. He was paired with a New Jersey liberal as his roommate. Needless to say, they didn't exactly hit it off. (In fact, that roommate is conducting a Twitter jihad against Ted this very day.)

Being a super smart geek, Ted naturally joined the Princeton debate team. He became a champion debater, winning multiple categories, including 1992 Team of the Year and 1992 Speaker of the Year. He additionally won significant national debates earning awards for the 1992 National Championship for Top Speaker and the North American Debating Championship Top Speaker. Today, he is forever enshrined in the Princeton debate hall of fame.

Ted continued his debating record at Harvard Law School where he became a world debating championship semifinalist.

While at Harvard, Ted served as the primary editor of the Harvard Law Review, the executive editor of the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy and the founding editor of the Harvard Latino Law Review. He graduated magnum cum laude from Harvard Law School.

One of Ted's law professors --- liberal lion lawyer Alan Dershowitz --- said this of his student:

"One of the sharpest students I had, in terms of analytic skills. I've had 10,000 students over my 50 years at Harvard. He has to qualify among the brightest of the students. Deeply principled. He thinks he's doing the right thing. I saw that years ago when he was a student. He was not a compromiser. He was not somebody who tried to make friends by accepting what was then the political correctness of the day."

Upon graduating from Harvard Law School, Ted landed a job as the first Hispanic Supreme Court justice law clerk in U.S. history, clerking for Chief Justice William Rehnquist. He later went into private practice defending his first love --- the United States Constitution.

Working on matters relating to the Second Amendment and the NRA, Ted helped prepare testimony for the impeachment proceedings against President Clinton. When he was 28, Cruz joined the George W. Bush presidential campaign in 1999 as a domestic policy adviser, advising then governor George W. Bush in a wide range of policy and legal matters, including civil justice, criminal justice, constitutional law, immigration and government reform.

During the 2000 election, in the case of Bush vs. Gore, Cruz was sent to Florida to sort out the legal mess created by the dangling chad situation. Cruz assisted in assembling the Bush legal team, devising strategy and drafting pleadings for filings with the Supreme Court of Florida and the U.S. Supreme Court. He helped lead the way to two big wins, clearing the way for Bush to become president.

He was still barely 30 years old.

Part III: The Supreme Court Years

At age 33, Ted Cruz became the youngest solicitor general of Texas in American history. He would go on to become the longest serving solicitor general, ferociously fighting for the Constitution. He sought out conservative, constitutional causes, distinguishing himself with exceptional achievements and victories:

• Cruz authored 70 United States Supreme Court briefs and presented 43 oral arguments, including nine before the United States Supreme Court --- more than any practicing lawyer in all of Texas or any current member of Congress. He took on some of the biggest cases decided by the courts in decades --- and won virtually every single time.

• Cruz won a huge Second Amendment victory in the District of Columbia versus Heller, drafting the amicus brief signed by the attorneys general of 31 different states and presenting the oral argument. This victory struck down a D.C. handgun ban as infringing upon the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms --- and it changed everything regarding your right to carry a gun.

• Cruz wrote a brief on behalf all 50 states in the Elk Grove Unified School District versus Newdow case, in which atheist activist Michael Newdow sued on behalf of his daughter to stop schools from reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. He objected to the phrase, "One Nation Under God." For months, the pledge was not spoken in nine western states --- until Cruz argued the case. The Supreme Court upheld Cruz's belief that Newdow had no standing to file suit on behalf of his daughter.

• Cruz successfully defended the constitutionality of the Ten Commandments Monument on the Texas State Capitol grounds before the Fifth Circuit Court and the U.S. Supreme Court. As a result, the Ten Commandments Monument currently stands on the grounds of the Texas State Capitol.

• Cruz fought on behalf of the state of Texas to uphold the death penalty sentence for a vicious gang member who was in the United States illegally when he and other gang members brutally beat, raped, tortured and killed two teenage girls in Houston. The Mexican Consulate became involved, as well as then President George W. Bush, who sided with the Mexican government and turned the case over to the International Court of Justice which ruled against Texas and stayed the execution. Texas then turned to Solicitor General Ted Cruz. Appearing before the U.S. Supreme Court, Cruz successfully defended the Constitution. In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that decisions from the International Court of Justice were not binding in any domestic law and even the president had no power to enforce them. Ted Cruz won and gang member Jose Medellin met his maker.

Ted Cruz has a proven record of fighting for and defending the United States Constitution --- even when it means going against the establishment. In the case of Medellin versus Texas, not only did he go against a brutal, illegal alien murderer, the country of Mexico, the Geneva Convention, the International Court of Justice --- but also his former boss and the president of the United States, George W. Bush. This may provide insight into why George W. Bush broke his long-standing policy not to comment on politics to say recently about Cruz, "I just don't like the guy." Being embarrassed and beaten on the international stage isn't generally followed by afternoon tea.

There's a reason why the Republican establishment in D.C. is known for not liking Cruz. They stand for the party, for themselves and for their own political power. Ted Cruz doesn't play party politics or political games. Ted Cruz stands for principles, values, integrity and the United States Constitution.

What does your candidate stand for?

Part IV: The Candidate

Ted Cruz is the real deal. He is a true conservative to the marrow of his bones. Not the kind of "conservative" you find in Washington, D.C., the kind that has betrayed us for decades --- but a true constitutional conservative as the Founders intended. The Constitution isn’t just an afterthought to Ted Cruz. He memorized this sacred document when he was 13 years old, and those words are ingrained in the very fabric of his being.

How does a man come to live and breath the Constitution? It's simple, really --- he was raised that way. Raised by a man who lost his freedom in Castro's Cuba and fled to the United States in search of freedom. Raised by a man who taught him to revere God and the Constitution of the United States. Raised by a man who lost his way because of alcoholism and atheism, but found his way back by the grace of God.

Ted Cruz was raised with the Bible and the Constitution on his kitchen table every single day of his life.

As valedictorian, magnum cum laude graduate, Ivy League scholar, debating champion, Supreme Court law clerk, defender of our constitutional rights and U.S. senator, Ted Cruz has held firm to conservative beliefs and values. He is a dedicated husband, loving father and committed Christian. He is a constitutionalist. But, most of all, he is consistent, with a proven track record and history.

For Cruz, it may be true that he has very few friends in Washington, D.C., but he should wear that as a badge of honor.

Constitutional principles have always come first for Ted --- even ahead of party loyalty. Like when he filibustered Obamacare for 21 hours --- alone --- trying to stop the unconstitutional takeover of America’s healthcare system. He knew his own party would come after him, but he had promised the American people to hold firm in his beliefs. So he did.

Ted understands the gravity of our situation, and he understands how to right the wrongs of the past eight years by holding true to the principles of the U.S. Constitution. It's all there, written long ago by the brilliant men who fought the fierce battle for freedom and liberty. We don't need a bailout, we don't need any new government programs. We need to return to the First Principles laid out for us by James Madison and Thomas Jefferson.

Ted Cruz is the George Washington we've prayed for. He's here --- the man who understands that government is not the solution but the problem. Ted Cruz understands that the restraints placed on the government by the Constitution are a good thing. Because absolute power corrupts absolutely. We've had enough of that corruption far too long.

It's time to send a man of honor and character to the White House, a man who says what he means and means what he says. It's time to send a man that will proudly place his hand upon the Bible and solemnly swear to faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and to the best of his ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

That man is Ted Cruz, and his time is now.

Featured Image: Senator Ted Cruz

Is the U.N. plotting to control 30% of U.S. land by 2030?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

A reliable conservative senator faces cancellation for listening to voters. But the real threat to public lands comes from the last president’s backdoor globalist agenda.

Something ugly is unfolding on social media, and most people aren’t seeing it clearly. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) — one of the most constitutionally grounded conservatives in Washington — is under fire for a housing provision he first proposed in 2022.

You wouldn’t know that from scrolling through X. According to the latest online frenzy, Lee wants to sell off national parks, bulldoze public lands, gut hunting and fishing rights, and hand America’s wilderness to Amazon, BlackRock, and the Chinese Communist Party. None of that is true.

Lee’s bill would have protected against the massive land-grab that’s already under way — courtesy of the Biden administration.

I covered this last month. Since then, the backlash has grown into something like a political witch hunt — not just from the left but from the right. Even Donald Trump Jr., someone I typically agree with, has attacked Lee’s proposal. He’s not alone.

Time to look at the facts the media refuses to cover about Lee’s federal land plan.

What Lee actually proposed

Over the weekend, Lee announced that he would withdraw the federal land sale provision from his housing bill. He said the decision was in response to “a tremendous amount of misinformation — and in some cases, outright lies,” but also acknowledged that many Americans brought forward sincere, thoughtful concerns.

Because of the strict rules surrounding the budget reconciliation process, Lee couldn’t secure legally enforceable protections to ensure that the land would be made available “only to American families — not to China, not to BlackRock, and not to any foreign interests.” Without those safeguards, he chose to walk it back.

That’s not selling out. That’s leadership.

It's what the legislative process is supposed to look like: A senator proposes a bill, the people respond, and the lawmaker listens. That was once known as representative democracy. These days, it gets you labeled a globalist sellout.

The Biden land-grab

To many Americans, “public land” brings to mind open spaces for hunting, fishing, hiking, and recreation. But that’s not what Sen. Mike Lee’s bill targeted.

His proposal would have protected against the real land-grab already under way — the one pushed by the Biden administration.

In 2021, Biden launched a plan to “conserve” 30% of America’s lands and waters by 2030. This effort follows the United Nations-backed “30 by 30” initiative, which seeks to place one-third of all land and water under government control.

Ask yourself: Is the U.N. focused on preserving your right to hunt and fish? Or are radical environmentalists exploiting climate fears to restrict your access to American land?

Smith Collection/Gado / Contributor | Getty Images

As it stands, the federal government already owns 640 million acres — nearly one-third of the entire country. At this rate, the government will hit that 30% benchmark with ease. But it doesn’t end there. The next phase is already in play: the “50 by 50” agenda.

That brings me to a piece of legislation most Americans haven’t even heard of: the Sustains Act.

Passed in 2023, the law allows the federal government to accept private funding from organizations, such as BlackRock or the Bill Gates Foundation, to support “conservation programs.” In practice, the law enables wealthy elites to buy influence over how American land is used and managed.

Moreover, the government doesn’t even need the landowner’s permission to declare that your property contributes to “pollination,” or “photosynthesis,” or “air quality” — and then regulate it accordingly. You could wake up one morning and find out that the land you own no longer belongs to you in any meaningful sense.

Where was the outrage then? Where were the online crusaders when private capital and federal bureaucrats teamed up to quietly erode private property rights across America?

American families pay the price

The real danger isn’t in Mike Lee’s attempt to offer more housing near population centers — land that would be limited, clarified, and safeguarded in the final bill. The real threat is the creeping partnership between unelected global elites and our own government, a partnership designed to consolidate land, control rural development, and keep Americans penned in so-called “15-minute cities.”

BlackRock buying entire neighborhoods and pricing out regular families isn’t by accident. It’s part of a larger strategy to centralize populations into manageable zones, where cars are unnecessary, rural living is unaffordable, and every facet of life is tracked, regulated, and optimized.

That’s the real agenda. And it’s already happening , and Mike Lee’s bill would have been an effort to ensure that you — not BlackRock, not China — get first dibs.

I live in a town of 451 people. Even here, in the middle of nowhere, housing is unaffordable. The American dream of owning a patch of land is slipping away, not because of one proposal from a constitutional conservative, but because global powers and their political allies are already devouring it.

Divide and conquer

This controversy isn’t really about Mike Lee. It’s about whether we, as a nation, are still capable of having honest debates about public policy — or whether the online mob now controls the narrative. It’s about whether conservatives will focus on facts or fall into the trap of friendly fire and circular firing squads.

More importantly, it’s about whether we’ll recognize the real land-grab happening in our country — and have the courage to fight back before it’s too late.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

URGENT: FIVE steps to CONTROL AI before it's too late!

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn: Only Trump dared to deliver on decades of empty promises

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

The Islamic regime has been killing Americans since 1979. Now Trump’s response proves we’re no longer playing defense — we’re finally hitting back.

The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.

Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.

It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.

Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.

The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.

The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.

Operation Midnight Hammer

The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.

USAF / Handout | Getty Images

To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.

As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.

They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.

If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.

This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.

What comes next

We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.

Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.

That would be catastrophic.

The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.

The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?

Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.

Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.

Now we pray

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.

The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.

He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Globalize the Intifada? Why Mamdani’s plan spells DOOM for America

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

If New Yorkers hand City Hall to Zohran Mamdani, they’re not voting for change. They’re opening the door to an alliance of socialism, Islamism, and chaos.

It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.