What Did Glenn's Listeners Think About Trump's Acceptance Speech?

Glenn mixed it up on his radio program Friday following Donald Trump's acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention.

"We're going to try something different today because I want to know how the speech that Donald Trump did played to you, the average American in your home. I know how it played in my home . . . we want to hear from you," Glenn said.

As one might expect, many on the right heralded the speech, while those on the left lambasted it.

RELATED: Bill Maher on Trump’s Scary RNC Speech: ‘He Looked a Lot Like Mussolini’

"What went through your mind last night? Good or bad? What did you think America?" Glenn asked.

Here's what callers had to say:

Wallace in Kansas

Well, after 76 minutes, I actually had to go back and find a hard copy because I heard the word "Constitution" one time. I never heard the word "freedom," never heard the word "liberty." What I heard was a mashing of the last year of Donald Trump's stump speeches. I wasn't inspired, you know, very much.

I will vote for Donald Trump. A vote is not an endorsement of everything he stands for; it's just Hillary Clinton scares me so bad. If Hillary gets in, here's what I know: This country has a 100 percent chance of getting shot in the head with Hillary Clinton. With Donald Trump, it's a 99 percent. I just hope I'm in the 1 percent.

Darren in Wyoming

Well, we're screwed. We got a high school bully and a crook running as our two leaders that are going to direct our country. And the difference between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, about 40 pounds. So they're one and the same --- more empty promises.

Derek in Utah

Going into the speech, I thought it was going to be the same thing --- build a wall, do this, do that --- coming out, the thing that really stuck in my mind was law and order, how many times he brought that up, how he was going to restore law and order. And in some ways, I believe that is good with a lot of the things that have been going on with the police forces, but at the same time, it really scares me on how he plans on accomplishing that.

I have never been a Trump supporter. Some things I can relate to 100 percent because there's so much anger, so much hate going on in America right now, and he really tapped into that. Even with his aggressive tone, with his position that he was taking there on stage, he was embodying what a lot of Americans feel right now and bringing that out. So they were able to tap into that, but it really worries me on how he's going to accomplish that. And that's the biggest thing I took away, that I'm a little bit scared about our freedoms and our liberties.

Carol in New York

My frame of mind going into it was, with our options, I was feeling desperate. I'm going to vote, but what decision am I going to make? I wanted to like him. No, I absolutely wanted to like him. The problem is that I don't, and I don't trust him. But there was something last night that changed my heart about him. I guess I'm -- I'm -- I love God, and I love our country. I run a food pantry. I've been a giver my whole life, and not because I'm a good person, but because God is good. And I believe our country needs to become stronger by uniting. If everyone would just be kinder and stronger and meet the need they see in front of them, I believe there would be no needs.

I see that people are running out of options. And he's someone, last night, that made me see that it's possible to have options again, and that gave me hope. And for the first time, I'm like, 'Okay. Alright. Now I'm going to listen.'

It was my gut feeling. I felt he was a little bit humble. I'm concerned about him not being a good guy. But I saw his family, and I'm starting to put all the pieces together. Like, well, you know, with the media the way it is, what do we really hear about anybody? You know, we just hear what they want us to hear. I'm becoming paranoid.

Brian in Oklahoma

I'll be completely honest with you, I have not been a Donald Trump supporter. I was a Ted Cruz supporter. So what I heard last night was a very strong understanding and itemization of the problems our country is having. And a lot of these problems that you listed, Obama won't even utter the words. So when I listened to him last night, he's uttering like the problem with unemployment, the problem with trade deals, the problem with illegal immigration. It's really hard to go in and give you specifics on a trade deal. You know, we're going to Page 405, Paragraph C, you know, Section whatever, and we're going to strike that line. People are most of the time not going to understand that. It's going to go over their head. But he understands that the trade deal with NAFTA and the TPP are lousy deals. It hurts our GDP. He understands that American jobs are being lost to illegal immigrants.

The main thing that I come away from this is, what gives me hope is that the guy gets it. We have a lot of problems, and he knows what they are. He's identified them. He spent 20 minutes listing them. I can't even get Obama to say the words "radical Islamic terrorism."

Shauuna in Utah

I went into it absolutely hating him. I've hated him for years. But his children impressed me so much that I'm hopeful that his love for his children will cause him to live up to the things he's promising. I think that he's promising that he'll take over the financial and pretty much leave the rest to Pence. That's what I'm thinking. He'll negotiate the deals with other countries so that we have a better balance.

I watched the whole thing. I'm a glutton for punishment.

Josh in Florida

Really, at heart, I couldn't vote for Hillary Clinton. So I have to do my citizen duty and vote. But what really stuck out to me was when he started speaking about the evangelical votes and when he said he didn't even know if he deserved it. To me, that sounded like he was trying to humble himself, for the first time really, and that's what really stuck out to me.

And my opinion is, the borders: Hillary wants them open; he wants them closed. That alone should be the deciding factor of this election because these people are trying to come in here and change the culture of America. Not even just our constitutional rights and all of that, the culture of America. So, yes, I am voting for Donald Trump.

Robin in Florida

I went into the speech with a little bit of anxiety because you've been hearing the snippets and seeing the snippets of him on TV: "I'm wealthy." "I build." "I did." "I did."

What I saw last night -- and mind you, the first time I've watched an entire acceptance speech; I've never watched the entire thing -- last night, I heard you, the citizen. This is about the people of America. I'm going to come get your back. I'm going to come watch over you. I'm going to stand between you and whatever's coming at us. It was all about us the citizens and someone coming back for us.

The other thing I've said I've seen and was reiterated last night is his family. And his family really surrounds him. And that is a building block that we are really missing now in this day.

Steve in Georgia

So I've now been watching this stuff for 25 years. And I'll tell you what, it never ceases to amaze me. What I saw last night was what I saw when Obama was giving his speeches, when Obama was running. When Obama stood behind the Greek pillars and accepted the mantel of leadership from the country, he was going to solve all of their problems. He was going to walk across water. And the people believed it because he told them what they wanted to hear. And those of us on the right, we watched this. And we watched this, and we were enamored with the ignorance of the American people. We watched this, and we were like, "How can these people believe this? How could they fall for this?"

And now, all of the people who commented on Obama are doing the same thing for Trump. He's promising that he's going to solve their problems. Yeah, it's nice to have somebody to stand up and speak what a lot of us believe to be truths. That's always great to hear, especially when political correctness has been working at removing free speech from society for the last 20 years. It's nice to hear that. It's refreshing.

However, where he loses me, do I believe that he'll do it? No, I'm not going to be one of the people in the country who is chasing a shiny object. I believe that, as you and many of your listeners do, that this country is about done. The experiment is about over. And I also believe that we had one more shot to solve the problem, and I think that we've missed it.

When anyone stands up and tells us that we have all these problems and he is the only one who can solve these problems, that's a problem. That's a problem in and of itself. And people need to wake up to that.

And, unfortunately, I've almost lost faith that the American people will wake up to it. Those of us who listen to your show, those of us who have been following this, those of us who take and have taken an objective view of politics and of the nature of what our country has become, sheer disappointment. Sheer disappointment.

Mark in Ohio

I'm a teacher in Manso, Ohio, and I live in a very economically depressed area. We used to have the GM staffing plant here, and it's gone. But, anyway, I had to defend myself quite a bit against other teachers who are Democratic supporters. And being a Republican, I had to keep coming up, what is the basis of my argument? And I kept thinking about Trump being a businessman who understands corporate taxes. And I kept hearing him say that he's going to bring back manufacturing to America. And I think that's one of the biggest areas that has concern for me, is bringing jobs to America. And giving people jobs. When he talks about understanding corporate taxes and taxes in general, I believe that's because he's a businessman. So, yes, it does strengthen my position among colleagues and friends.

Nicole in Massachusetts

I'm so pleased to speak to you. And before I start, I just want to say one thing: You've had such a profound impact in my life that I actually met my husband and happily married because of Restoring Love. I met him at Highpoint Church. So I just wanted to let you know that you had that impact on my life. And thank you so much.

So as a millennial in Massachusetts, my BS-ometer was just blowing up last night, and I believe that this man has no integrity at all, and he has proven that to me over and over and over again, throughout his campaign.

I think what the speech and what all of the speeches preceding his speech attempted to do was to make him that good guy --- and he has no integrity. So I think people really want to believe that he's a good guy, and as my mom has pointed out to me repeatedly, his family is his biggest asset because they speak so highly. And people so desperately want to cling to the idea that Donald Trump might be a good man.

I don't think we can trust anything he said last night. It was a complete overreach, to the point where he was even hitting Democratic talking points. And I understand that, you know, unity was the theme. So in that regard, his speech made sense. But he really -- I mean, it was just -- it was lies. And to me, it was so apparent, he's not a good man, he's not going to honor his word. And if we're going to fall for the, "Oh, well, his children say he's wonderful," listen, criminals are really good to their own family. So why would we think that just because he's good to his family, he won't screw us in the long run?

Ashley in Georgia

I went in feeling lost, and I came out feeling lost. I feel like he's got some really good speechwriters around him, and he's going to turn into a really good politician.

I feel like my only hope is that he'll be smart enough to put really smart people around him so he doesn't totally screw up the country if he gets in. I don't believe anything he said because of his actions in the past. Because the history of this man doing what he's done his whole entire life, why would this be any different? I don't think he will be any different. I think he will be who he is, even though he says something different, even though he said something different last night. Our words mean nothing if there's no action to support what we say.

When your actions over the years have proven you to be one way and then all of a sudden you start saying something else, I don't believe you, until your actions start following suit. In life, you can say what you want to me. You can say all the right things to me, but when you've got a history, you condition me not to believe you. I've been conditioned not to believe him because of his actions. And I think that's a big thing.

Mary in Ohio

I went into the speech last night undecided because I am definitely not a Hillary supporter, but I came out frightened because he was whipping those people into a frenzy. He was spouting and screaming nationalism, and it's what I imagined the German people were hearing in the late '20s and early '30s. I think it was the position of his head, which may sound kind of strange, but when he was waiting for a reaction, his chin went up, he was looking down. I think he looked like any dictator that I have ever seen speak, and it frightened me.

Vince in Tennessee

Going in, I did not have any expectation of voting for Donald Trump. I was actually going to be proud to, for the first time in my life, sit home and not vote because I couldn't put my name on this and go before God.

Living in Tennessee, I know how Tennessee is going to go anyways. However, shy of speaking of the Constitution, return to constitutional values, I didn't hear that last night, so I didn't have any change in my heart for Trump. The thing that did make an impact on me was when Ted Cruz said, "Please, don't stay at home." And he said, "I tell you, I'm not voting for Hillary." He didn't come out and say he's voting for Donald, but the fact that he said, "Don't stay home," that spoke to me a little bit more. And now I'm having to reenter into prayer about, "What do I do now?"

Pat in Mississippi

Well, me and my husband live in rural Mississippi. My husband stayed up. He gets up at 4:30 in the morning. He stayed up to listen to this speech. We were both big Cruz supporters. We're voting for Trump. It's a no-brainer.

Number one, the wall. The safety of our country. Number two, I work in the schools. I see the kids have no motivation because the parents either live off the government or have two low-paying jobs. They have to live in a family where the people are working and have something to look forward to. The third thing is, I believe he's going to get the right people for the job to fix this government mess. It is so bad. There are so many good people out here in this country that are well educated and can fix stuff.

Featured Image: Screenshot from The Glenn Beck Program, July 22, 2016.

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.