Will Your Children Even Need a Drivers License?

So long DMV! It's been swell, but your time has passed. At least, that will be the case for most children or grandchildren coming of age today. Self-driving cars are the way of the future.

Yesterday, Faraday Future unveiled its first electric car --- the FF91 --- at the 2017 Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, calling it a new species that reformats the future. The unveiling included a demo of the driverless car finding a parking spot and slipping easily into an open space.

"They move the car in this loaded parking lot in the fifth slot, fourth row --- or whatever it was --- and then they have a guy drive up with a Faraday to the doors of the building. He takes out his phone, pushes the Faraday app and pushes park. A little light, where the hood ornament used to go on cars, a little round circle lights up on the car which tells people it's driverless now. It starts slowly --- with traffic, driving around it --- and it searches each row for a parking space, finds it, backs in, three-point turn and shuts itself off. Pretty incredible," Glenn said.

The world is changing and will operate in an entirely different way for future generations.

Read below or listen to the full segment from Hour 1 for answers to these questions:

• What did Faraday do in the 1800s to get children interested in science?

• What patent did Uber recently receive?

• What role will cars play for the next generation?

• How are manufacturing jobs like cotton picking?

• How do you stop civil unrest in a jobless society?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

 

Featured Image: Faraday Future's Nick Sampson, SVP of R&D + Engineering speaks in front of the just introduced FF91 electric vehicle at the company's press conference at the 2017 Consumer Electronics Show (CES2017) in Las Vegas, Nevada, on January 3, 2017. (Photo Credit: FREDERIC J. BROWN/AFP/Getty Images)

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:

GLENN: Agonizing statements that everybody at least on the right remembers. Nancy Pelosi made the statement when they passed Obamacare, she said, "Don't worry, now if you want to be a poet, you can be a poet. If you want to be a painter, you can now be a painter and not have to worry about it."

There is a big idea behind what sounds crazy, giving people free money. The world is changing. We want to talk about that.

And the new Faraday car that is supposed to be better than the Tesla car. Tesla and Faraday, two of the most important scientists of the 1800s and early 1900s at battle again. Tesla versus Faraday. Faraday was just launched yesterday. They showed this new car that was supposed to be better than the Tesla. They launched it yesterday in Vegas. We'll tell you about that.

But at the same time, Tesla pat end something that will change your driving life and the life of your children may never drive. If they are ten -- if they are five or ten, chances are they never, ever get something called a driver's license. The good news: The DMV is no longer part of our life. We begin there, right now.

(music)

GLENN: Hello, America. And welcome to the program. So glad that you're here.

We have to talk also about Megyn Kelly. Megyn Kelly is going to NBC. The talk of Megyn Kelly online is absolutely phenomenal. And I just -- I want to say this, then we're going to come back to Megyn Kelly. She's being called a traitor for going to NBC. May I ask, when did we raise our hand or put our hand over our heart to pledge allegiance to Fox?

How can you possibly be a traitor to your country by working for NBC? Do you think maybe we've blown this out of proportion just a little bit?

We'll get to that in just a little while.

Also, I do want to have a conversation about Julian Assange today. We want to touch on that. Sean Hannity came yesterday. He says he has evolved on Julian Assange, where he stands on Julian Assange, as we still stand. We have questioned him from the very beginning.

I don't like his tactics. I don't -- I don't think stealing documents from the United States government is a good idea, although like I have said since the beginning of Edward Snowden: I'm not convinced he's a traitor. I just don't like the way he did it. If he wouldn't have left the United States and he would have been willing to stand trial, then I believe that it was -- it would have been easier for me to stand by him.

Going to Russia and you have to -- you know, it's he said/she said. I don't know. But I'm glad he released the things that he did. I just don't trust him.

Sean Hannity met with Julian Assange. And he has been spending quite a bit of time with him lately on the phone, et cetera, et cetera. Says he has a new understanding of him and believes, quote, every word he says, end quote.

It's an interesting transition, and I'd love to get into that. And here's some of the words that Julian Assange said. I will tell you, watching a piece of the interview, looking into his eyes like people look into Puti-Put's eyes, looking into his eyes, it looks like he was telling the truth. Does it matter? Coming up in just a minute.

Also, oh, my gosh, Dan Rather has said that the media has got to call out Donald Trump on lies, and they can't say that he misspoke. They can't say that he wasn't artful. They must call it a lie. Coming from Dan Rather. Unbelievable.

We'll get to that.

Let me start with -- let me start with Faraday because it's kind of fun. The new Faraday car has come out.

Faraday is a really interesting -- really interesting scientist. And I -- it's been a long time since I've read this, so I'm just pulling it out of my butt. So my apologies to anybody who is a big fan of Faraday for butchering this.

Faraday, they used to have over in England -- I don't remember what it was called. The London Science Society, or whatever it was. They would have a lecture every Christmas Eve, and they would invite children to come in. And they would try to do something to engage children into the world of science. Faraday did something on his Christmas Eve address on the candle. And he explained the scientific properties of a candle.

And this swept not only London, but Europe and parts of the United States. This is about 1860, or so. Please, my apologies for butchering this. But it swept and captured the minds of a lot of children in the 1800s.

It was something that ignited their imagination and got them interested in science itself.

Faraday, for all of the things that he has furthered in science, Faraday is a guy who I think we need more of today. And I think this new car named Faraday and Tesla, Elon Musk, I think they're on the right step. They are igniting people's imaginations.

Yesterday, in Vegas, they're having a big electronics show. I couldn't get my wife to -- I couldn't convince my wife that this was a good anniversary weekend in Vegas. For some reason, she thought that would be more about me and not about us. But they were having this big science and electronics show on the future. And they just released the Faraday car, which the Faraday car is the FF91. I've never even heard of it. Have you guys heard of it?

JEFFY: No.

PAT: No.

GLENN: I didn't even know this thing was being built. It looks pretty good. It doesn't look as good as a Tesla. It's not quite as sexy as a Tesla.

JEFFY: Pretty cool.

GLENN: But it is pretty cool. Go ahead.

JEFFY: No, I just -- it's pretty cool. It looks a lot better than I thought it would.

GLENN: How does it look better than you thought --

JEFFY: Because I hadn't seen it.

GLENN: You just told me 30 seconds ago you had never even heard of it.

JEFFY: No. I know. I had not seen it. And Pat Gray earlier said, "It's not as cool as a Tesla." And so I thought, "Oh, it's got to be kind of ugly." When I just brought up the photo, it's not bad. I'm not sure what I had in my head, but it wasn't as cool as it is.

GLENN: Thank you. All right. Good. Thank you.

(chuckling)

Appreciate it.

PAT: That was an important explanation.

GLENN: It was.

JEFFY: He started it.

PAT: It was important.

GLENN: No, it was a good comment.

God help us, when does Stu come back? Seriously.

PAT: I don't know. I don't know.

GLENN: He's got the sniffles. He's got the sniffles and he's out for two days.

Anyway, so the Faraday car comes out, and they -- they take it out to the parking lot, and they have people in the audience that say, "Somebody in the audience pick a row." And the guy says, you know, "Third row. Pick a slot." Somebody else says, "Fifth slot."

Great. They move the car in this loaded parking lot in the fifth slot, fourth row, or whatever it was. And then they have a guy drive up with a Faraday to the doors of the building, and then he takes out his phone and he pushes the Faraday app and pushes park.

A little light where the hood ornament used to go on cars, a little round circle lights up on the car which tells people it's driverless now.

And it goes and it starts to slowly -- with traffic, driving around it, it slowly goes and it searches each row for a parking space, finds it, backs in, three-point turn, and shuts itself off.

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: Pretty incredible.

PAT: Yeah, that's cool. That's cool.

GLENN: Pretty incredible.

Now, here's what -- here's what I thought of when I saw this, was the light on the front.

And the reason why I thought of the light on the front is because of what Tesla has just pat end. Your world is completely going to change. The light on the front is telling people this is a driverless car and there is no driver in the car.

Tesla just patented something, and let me see if I can get it. I'm sorry. No, no, no. It's not Tesla. It's Uber. Uber just patented a light-up sign to go on top of cars.

Now, this is a sheet of glass that is about -- you know, plexiglass -- about the size -- length of the back door of a car. All right?

So it goes on the back half, kind of like the taxi sign, you know, goes, except it's going from hood to tail. Instead of from door-to-door, hood to tail. Takes up about half of the back of the car.

And what it is, is just a sheet of plexiglass. But the plexiglass can change color, and the -- when you say I want an Uber car, you can design how it's supposed to light up.

So I want a triangle. I want a circle. I want three triangles. I want a triangle, a circle, and a square.

And you push that in. And so then when you're standing outside waiting for your car or you walk outside looking for your car, you know you're the circle, circle, triangle, square. Okay? And it lights up.

Now, that makes it easy for you to find the car, but it also is moving us in the direction of -- are you here for Beck? You no longer have to ask because soon there will be no one in the car because it will be driverless. Which brings me back to Tesla.

If you buy a Tesla car today as of 2017, there is a line now in the contract that says, "You kind of don't really own the car outright. Yes, it is your car. You can do everything you want. You can drive it over a cliff if you want to. The one thing you cannot do is turn it into a taxi service." Why? Because Tesla has a longer term plan.

Tesla's cars -- Tesla cars are now being built -- and as you know, it's all software updates.

So he's -- Elon Musk is really brilliant. He's gone back to the ideas of Henry Ford. Henry Ford said, "You can have every color you want as long as it's black." And if you remember, he only made the Model T and then the Model A. And if I'm not mistaken, and somebody look this up for me real quick, I don't believe you could buy the Model T and the Model A. You could only buy one or the other, I think.

What he was trying to do was build a car -- because he was really, really frugal. He was really nuts. I really dislike Henry Ford.

But if you worked for Henry Ford, you couldn't buy one of his cars. If you worked at the Ford factory, you would think that you would get a special discount. No, no, no, if you wanted to buy one of his cars, you had to schedule a meeting with Henry Ford. And he would come in and say, "I want to see all of your paperwork. I want to see your books at home. I want to make sure that you don't have debt. I want to make sure that you're living a life that is not -- that's not going to put you over the barrel."

So you had to get permission from Papa Ford to buy one. But he also built the cars to be interchangeable so you would only buy one in your lifetime. You would buy a Model T, and then anything -- any update, you could just buy the update and put that on the car so you would never have to worry -- it's the exact opposite of what cars did back then.

Uber has just picked this up with the software updates. But the new software update that is in the contract today is mind-blowing to even think about. One of the big ideas of the day. We'll get to that here coming up in just a second.

First, let me tell you about our sponsor this half-hour. It's Zip Recruiter. Zip Recruiter, we have -- you know, everybody tells me that my company is collapsing. In fact, it was supposed to be out of business -- no, it was two years ago. Then a year ago. Then by the end of summer. And then definitely by the 1st of December. But it's crazy bad. In fact, we're still hiring. If you would like to work for this failing company, you can -- you can just go and apply.

Anyway, Zip Recruiter, we have -- because we made major changes at the company, we let I think about 100 people go. Somewhere in that area. And we've hired now I think 110 people back, different people. We've had to use Zip Recruiter -- I mean, we were looking for a new HR person. We were looking for, you know, our new accounting people. How do we find them when you don't have the staff to be able to do it?

It's a small business problem. But big businesses use Zip Recruiter just as effectively and at just the same rate that we do as a small business. When you are looking to hire somebody, you need it to be easy and simple.

Posting your job on one place isn't enough to find the quality job candidates. But do you have time to post to 100-plus job sites? Because I don't. Do you have time to read through them all, sort them all? Do you have an easy way to do it?

Zip Recruiter is your answer. One post lists all of the job sites. Then when they come in, you can easily categorize and you don't have to worry about the phone calls. You don't have to worry about any of it. It all comes into one place. It's easy for you to hire the right person fast.

Try it out now for free by going to Zip Recruiter, slash, Beck. That's ZipRecruiter.com/Beck. ZipRecruiter.com/Beck. Try it for free now.

[break]

GLENN: I tell you, the -- what Tesla is doing should be a wake-up call to everyone. And this ties into something else that I want to share with you. There's a new report out that says that routine jobs are getting faced out. You will not believe the percentage of routine jobs.

These are the jobs that Donald Trump just saved with Carrier. The kind of stuff that's assembly line. They are disappearing fast, and they're not coming back.

And people are just stopping to look for work. They can't find any work. We'll talk about that because this plays into it on how much your life is going to change and what Finland is starting to do to look into something that I think is grossly misunderstood by a lot of people.

Hats off, actually, to Finland for trying this, if indeed this is what they're trying to solve. But we'll get into that in a second. I want to tell you what Tesla is doing to show you the entrance of where your life is going to change and how it's going to change.

If you went and bought a Tesla today, in the new contract starting in 2017, there was one line that said you can do anything you want to do with your car, but you cannot use it as a taxi service. And the reason why is because they believe this is the future. And they are going to maintain partial rights to your car because I believe Tesla is going to come out with their own service that will put your car to work for you.

If you -- I was talking to the guy -- what's the competition of Uber? It's Lyft. I was talking to the guy who is the founder of Lyft. And his daughter was 18 years old. And he said -- now he -- this is the reason he started Lyft. One of the reasons he started Lyft.

He said, "Honey, you know, you're 18. You don't even have your driver's license ready yet. You're getting ready to go. You need to get a driver's license." And she said, "Why would I get a driver's license, Dad? That's ridiculous. I don't need a driver's license. I'll just call for an Uber."

He realized that cars are not playing the role to the next generation the way they've always played a role for us, where we've dreamt about our first car and we couldn't get our first car. And it was a status symbol and everything else.

Now people just want to get around. And they don't see the reason of owning the liability.

Tesla is now starting something in the future. The first line in the contract is there to set you up, that when you take your car -- you buy a Tesla. In the future, near future, I believe, they will start offering something and say, "Look, not only is this car effective on miles per gallon, you know, because it doesn't have any. But not only is it cheap or inexpensive, but it will also earn money for you." When you go to work, you'll be able to put it on auto, and somebody who is calling for a car -- your car will leave the carport or leave the parking space, and it will go pick them up, take them to the airport, pick somebody else up. While you're working your eight-hour day, it will be out working and making money for you. And then you say it's got to be back in its space by 4 o'clock. That's when I need my car. It will go park itself back in the space and alert you where it is so you can make money instead of just having that car a liability for you.

That is the future. And that's the way car owners -- car companies are trying to look at the future. And lo and behold, the big three. I don't even think they're on this page yet. It's going to come faster than you think.

Now, what does this mean for your job? I'll tell you coming up.

[break]

GLENN: All right. Let me give you two stories. First one, there's a new report out, new study conducted by three economists that say, "As many routine jobs disappear that require repeating a narrow set of repeated tasks -- so, in other words, these are assembly line jobs.

The workers in those jobs, as they lose those jobs have opted for lower paying, low skill manual work or just stopped working.

Okay. This -- this is -- this is a problem on many fronts. First of all, we should not be looking for manufacturing jobs, you know, and trying to keep the manufacturing jobs here in the United States. We cannot compete.

And this is something that I said probably ten years ago when George Bush -- probably, wow, 12 years ago, when George W. Bush was talking about the open borders et cetera, et cetera. And I said at the time, "Look, you know -- what was -- what was the -- what was it? Transamericanada or Meximericanada (phonetic). Remember that, Pat?

PAT: Yes.

GLENN: Where they were talking about the new currency that would be -- what was it? Meximericanada?

PAT: The Amero is what the currency was.

GLENN: Yeah, the Amero. That's what it was. The currency was the Amero.

And I was trying to remember -- I was trying to think, "How can you possibly do that?" Canada and the United States maybe, because they're -- they're similar in their value. But the peso, there's no way you can bring the peso in. How are you going to bring Mexico up with the United States dollar?

You can't. So the idea behind the Amero got me thinking, "Wait a minute. Wait a minute. If you're going to try to do one world currency or one currency for North America, you can't bring everybody up to the standard of America. You have to bring everybody down. You have to bring America down to the standard of Mexico. You've got to meet at best somewhere in the middle because no way you can bring the rest of the world up to us. You have to bring us down and destroy everybody's currency."

Now, that was 12 years ago.

Now we're still -- still talking and living as if it's 1950 or 1980 or even 1985. It is not. And the world is changing.

So these jobs are going away, and they're going to be replaced not only in China, but they will be replaced, for instance -- what wasn't said about the Donald Trump Carrier deal until after was the president of Carrier said, "Well, look, we can't keep Americans at these jobs. They don't want these jobs."

And what happens is, they will -- it's almost like kids -- when we were kids, you know, our summer job was berry picking. The minute you could get away from berry picking, you did. Nobody was like, "I'm going to be a berry picker and the best berry picker ever." Nobody was -- nobody was dreaming for the berry picking job, except those who didn't have a job.

As soon as you got something better, you got out of the fields. That's the way an assembly line job is. And in America, it is the entry-level, and you're out as soon as you can be.

In Mexico, those jobs are coveted. They want those jobs. So Carrier doesn't have a problem with retraining people because they'll stay sometimes for life. It's more like working in Detroit in the 1940s and '50s. You wanted that job, and you could work on the assembly line for the rest of your life.

That's the way those jobs are looked at overseas. So it's not just about the low pay. It's not about the benefits. It's not about, you know, the EPA standards or the OSHA standards. It's also about the mentality of the people.

And if you're trying to build something, you don't want -- you don't want people on the assembly line that are just looking at this job as a dolt job. You want somebody who is excited to come into work, to do it, to do it right, and to help your business streamline and grow.

You can't find that, according to Carrier, here in America. So what happened?

Well, this deal was made to keep 1,000 jobs in America, but about three days after the deal was announced, the Carrier president came out and said, "By the way, we're going to use some of this money to put robotics in because this is a long-term problem." So this isn't about Carrier, this is just to use this example as, this is what's going to happen in all of those jobs. Robots and robotics will change everything.

If you think that it won't, look at what Google is doing. Look at what Google is doing right now. Why do you have Google for free? We talked about this yesterday.

You have Google for free because they're trying to come up with artificial intelligence. They're trying to map the human mind.

And that's why your search engine is free. Because they're getting something more valuable from this deal than you are. They're mapping the way the human brain thinks.

So in our lifetime, I believe by 2030, artificial intelligence will be everywhere. That's the year -- 2030 is the expected arrival date of what's called transhumanism. Man and machine merging.

So these jobs are going to become less and less popularity. They will be literally the cotton picking jobs of the 1800s.

So they're gone. But they also say by 2050 -- what is it, 70 percent -- 50 or 70 percent of all jobs will turn over.

So 50 to 70 percent of all of us who are together right now, we will lose our job or we will get out of our job. Fifty to 70 percent. Because that job will no longer exist. Now, that's going to happen in the next 30 years. Think of that.

By the way, just to give you an idea: We're 15 or -- we're 16 years away now from September 11th.

So in -- in double the amount of time that we've had since September 11th, that's how much time we have left now on losing anywhere from 30 to 60 percent or 70 percent of all jobs.

So nobody is thinking about this. The politicians are all just talking about, I'm going to save jobs, I'm going to save jobs. You can't save jobs. In fact, you don't want to save jobs. You want to innovate. By saving jobs, you're going to hurt innovation.

What you have to be thinking is leapfrog thinking. You have to be thinking about the big idea. What do people do when they don't have to do that manual labor? What do they have to do when -- instead of saying, "I'm going to save taxi jobs by taxing Uber or by taxing Tesla and a self-driving or banning the self-driving cars from allowing them to go out and be used as a taxi service because I got to save those jobs" -- that's not the future. The future is encourage Tesla to be able to make this and to make it easy for them to get rid of the taxi driver jobs.

Well, wait a minute, that doesn't make any sense. It does if you believe in people. And this is the big question that we have to answer in the next 20 years, maybe the next ten: Do we actually believe in people?

Now, I'm going to tell you a story that is really pretty outrageous. Man, is it that time already?

A really outrageous story that is coming out of Finland that I want you to look -- I want to look at it in a completely different way.

If I told you -- and this is true, Finland has just launched an experiment giving 2,000 people free money until 2019, what would you say?

Pat. Finland giving free money away. Your gut reaction. They're getting rid of Social Security and welfare and everything else. They're just giving everybody else a check for I think it's $549 a month. And they're just -- 590 a month. And they're just giving these people $590 a month. That's a living wage for doing absolutely nothing for the next two years.

PAT: They'll continue to do nothing for the next two years. I mean, they're -- and plus, they're not -- they're not getting rid of Social Security, right? They're not getting rid of the other Social Security programs. This is in addition to them.

GLENN: No, hang on. For these 2,000 people, that covers everything. The problem over in Finland apparently is, if you are on Social Security, if you are on employment, there's like -- I don't remember how many -- there's like 400 different categories, and each of them have to be calculated differently. Each of them are the responsibility of the individual. And if you get -- if you miss -- you mischeck a box, you can lose everything. And it's constantly changing. So it -- what they're trying to do is get rid of all the bureaucracy, get rid of -- for 2,000 people, they're doing an experiment. Get rid of all the bureaucracy and just give people a flat check for 590 a month.

What do you think will happen?

PAT: I think those people will continue to do nothing.

GLENN: And why do you say that?

PAT: Because that's human nature, is when you're taken of, you continue to rely on the government.

GLENN: Okay. I happen to agree with you. I happen to agree with you. However, there's new studies -- now, this is not a study from First World countries. These are studies from Second and Third World countries.

New studies that are out, and it's very little evidence. They're very early in this because there are people like Y Combinator and Silicon Valley that are doing experiments on this themselves.

Because what they're trying to figure out is, when nobody has a job, you can't find a job, A, how do we stop society from going into civil unrest because they have no job? B, will people start their own business?

In America, if you start -- and I shouldn't say this. In some states and in much of the first world, if you start your own business -- I go out of business, I can't collect unemployment. Because I own my own business. So there's no safety net for me.

I'm penalized for doing what the capitalist system is telling us to do. Go out, start your own business, have an idea, work with it. I don't have a safety net.

If I go out of business, you get unemployment, but I don't. This takes away that fear. And they're finding in Third and Second World countries that if you give people a basic bottom-of-the-line income, that they -- there's a percentage -- and I don't know what the percentage is yet, and I don't know if they know. But there is a percentage that will go out and now create jobs because they are free to be able to think differently.

That's the idea, the concept behind some of these experiments. I'm not sure about Finland. They do -- they do talk about it in the stories that I've read. But I know that Y Combinator in Silicon Valley is the leader on this, and that is what they're really focused on is: How do we stop society from going into civil unrest, which is a conversation we have to have? And, B, can you get people in America who are used to just getting everything for free basically, having their own way? Can you get them to change their attitudes towards this? Not about giving free money away, but receiving it and not just sitting on the couch. And doing that at the same time you have virtual reality.

Imagine the number of people who have $590, which is enough to pay for -- in Finland, enough to pay for your food, enough to pay for a small little apartment, or whatever it is. You can survive one person on 590 a month. Now, maybe get a part-time job so I can afford the gaming system. Am I going to just sit on my couch and live a virtual reality world and do nothing, or am I going to go out and get another job and improve my life? That's a question we have to answer.

Finland is starting it. And it will be interesting to watch what they find.

And now, this: My -- My Patriot Supply.

Let me -- before I give you My Patriot Supply. Let me tell you what happened with bitcoin yesterday. Bitcoin is up now 16 percent in the first day of trading for the new year. 16 percent.

As of the end of August of last year, the up -- no, I'm sorry. By the beginning of September, yeah, it was up 90 percent. As of yesterday, from the beginning of 2016, it's up 123 percent. Why do you think that's happening?

Because people know tough times are coming. People know, "I'm not sure this system is going to last." My Patriot Supply wants you to make -- this is better than a resolution, make a commitment to be self-reliant. My Patriot Supply is standing by to help you right now, and this week you can get their 72-hour food kit for ten bucks. Three days of food for $10. It lasts up to 25 years. For $40, you can get a family of four to have your three-day -- now, this is what the Department of Homeland Security recommends that you have. I know it's crazy conspiracy theories to think -- the government is telling you, you should have three days' worth of food.

You can fulfill the basic minimum and get started on being self-reliant this week. Ten dollars for an emergency 72-hour kit. Call 800-200-9031. 800-200-9031. Go to prepare with Glenn. Double N. PreparewithGlenn.com. Limit four per order. 800-200-9031. PreparewithGlenn.com.

[break]

GLENN: We need to continue this conversation because I want to make it really clear: I'm not advocating for a universal government payment.

PAT: It almost sounded like you were advocating that.

JEFFY: Yes, it did.

GLENN: No, no, no. I specifically talk about Y Combinator is doing this. We have to think about these things. I don't think it will work in First World countries. And, again, the evidence is very scarce in Third World countries, but it is emerging evidence from Third World countries that it is working that way.

We have to talk about the bigger picture, which is a, you know, 40 to 70 percent job turnover and job elimination in the next 30 years. What does that mean for society? And how do we rethink what we're doing? I am definitely not for government handouts by any stretch of the imagination. It's Finland. Let me them do whatever they want. We should never be engaged in that. But private corporations should be thinking about this. And we should be talking about it as people. And I want to talk about that, when we come back.

Also, Megyn Kelly -- Kelly, and Dan Rather lecturing us on honesty.

URGENT: Supreme Court case could redefine religious liberty

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

The state is effectively silencing professionals who dare speak truths about gender and sexuality, redefining faith-guided speech as illegal.

This week, free speech is once again on the line before the U.S. Supreme Court. At stake is whether Americans still have the right to talk about faith, morality, and truth in their private practice without the government’s permission.

The case comes out of Colorado, where lawmakers in 2019 passed a ban on what they call “conversion therapy.” The law prohibits licensed counselors from trying to change a minor’s gender identity or sexual orientation, including their behaviors or gender expression. The law specifically targets Christian counselors who serve clients attempting to overcome gender dysphoria and not fall prey to the transgender ideology.

The root of this case isn’t about therapy. It’s about erasing a worldview.

The law does include one convenient exception. Counselors are free to “assist” a person who wants to transition genders but not someone who wants to affirm their biological sex. In other words, you can help a child move in one direction — one that is in line with the state’s progressive ideology — but not the other.

Think about that for a moment. The state is saying that a counselor can’t even discuss changing behavior with a client. Isn’t that the whole point of counseling?

One‑sided freedom

Kaley Chiles, a licensed professional counselor in Colorado Springs, has been one of the victims of this blatant attack on the First Amendment. Chiles has dedicated her practice to helping clients dealing with addiction, trauma, sexuality struggles, and gender dysphoria. She’s also a Christian who serves patients seeking guidance rooted in biblical teaching.

Before 2019, she could counsel minors according to her faith. She could talk about biblical morality, identity, and the path to wholeness. When the state outlawed that speech, she stopped. She followed the law — and then she sued.

Her case, Chiles v. Salazar, is now before the Supreme Court. Justices heard oral arguments on Tuesday. The question: Is counseling a form of speech or merely a government‑regulated service?

If the court rules the wrong way, it won’t just silence therapists. It could muzzle pastors, teachers, parents — anyone who believes in truth grounded in something higher than the state.

Censored belief

I believe marriage between a man and a woman is ordained by God. I believe that family — mother, father, child — is central to His design for humanity.

I believe that men and women are created in God’s image, with divine purpose and eternal worth. Gender isn’t an accessory; it’s part of who we are.

I believe the command to “be fruitful and multiply” still stands, that the power to create life is sacred, and that it belongs within marriage between a man and a woman.

And I believe that when we abandon these principles — when we treat sex as recreation, when we dissolve families, when we forget our vows — society fractures.

Are those statements controversial now? Maybe. But if this case goes against Chiles, those statements and others could soon be illegal to say aloud in public.

Faith on trial

In Colorado today, a counselor cannot sit down with a 15‑year‑old who’s struggling with gender identity and say, “You were made in God’s image, and He does not make mistakes.” That is now considered hate speech.

That’s the “freedom” the modern left is offering — freedom to affirm, but never to question. Freedom to comply, but never to dissent. The same movement that claims to champion tolerance now demands silence from anyone who disagrees. The root of this case isn’t about therapy. It’s about erasing a worldview.

The real test

No matter what happens at the Supreme Court, we cannot stop speaking the truth. These beliefs aren’t political slogans. For me, they are the product of years of wrestling, searching, and learning through pain and grace what actually leads to peace. For us, they are the fundamental principles that lead to a flourishing life. We cannot balk at standing for truth.

Maybe that’s why God allows these moments — moments when believers are pushed to the wall. They force us to ask hard questions: What is true? What is worth standing for? What is worth dying for — and living for?

If we answer those questions honestly, we’ll find not just truth, but freedom.

The state doesn’t grant real freedom — and it certainly isn’t defined by Colorado legislators. Real freedom comes from God. And the day we forget that, the First Amendment will mean nothing at all.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Get ready for sparks to fly. For the first time in years, Glenn will come face-to-face with Megyn Kelly — and this time, he’s the one in the hot seat. On October 25, 2025, at Dickies Arena in Fort Worth, Texas, Glenn joins Megyn on her “Megyn Kelly Live Tour” for a no-holds-barred conversation that promises laughs, surprises, and maybe even a few uncomfortable questions.

What will happen when two of America’s sharpest voices collide under the spotlight? Will Glenn finally reveal the major announcement he’s been teasing on the radio for weeks? You’ll have to be there to find out.

This promises to be more than just an interview — it’s a live showdown packed with wit, honesty, and the kind of energy you can only feel if you are in the room. Tickets are selling fast, so don’t miss your chance to see Glenn like you’ve never seen him before.

Get your tickets NOW at www.MegynKelly.com before they’re gone!

What our response to Israel reveals about us

JOSEPH PREZIOSO / Contributor | Getty Images

I have been honored to receive the Defender of Israel Award from Prime Minister Netanyahu.

The Jerusalem Post recently named me one of the strongest Christian voices in support of Israel.

And yet, my support is not blind loyalty. It’s not a rubber stamp for any government or policy. I support Israel because I believe it is my duty — first as a Christian, but even if I weren’t a believer, I would still support her as a man of reason, morality, and common sense.

Because faith isn’t required to understand this: Israel’s existence is not just about one nation’s survival — it is about the survival of Western civilization itself.

It is a lone beacon of shared values in the Middle East. It is a bulwark standing against radical Islam — the same evil that seeks to dismantle our own nation from within.

And my support is not rooted in politics. It is rooted in something simpler and older than politics: a people’s moral and historical right to their homeland, and their right to live in peace.

Israel has that right — and the right to defend herself against those who openly, repeatedly vow her destruction.

Let’s make it personal: if someone told me again and again that they wanted to kill me and my entire family — and then acted on that threat — would I not defend myself? Wouldn’t you? If Hamas were Canada, and we were Israel, and they did to us what Hamas has done to them, there wouldn’t be a single building left standing north of our border. That’s not a question of morality.

That’s just the truth. All people — every people — have a God-given right to protect themselves. And Israel is doing exactly that.

My support for Israel’s right to finish the fight against Hamas comes after eighty years of rejected peace offers and failed two-state solutions. Hamas has never hidden its mission — the eradication of Israel. That’s not a political disagreement.

That’s not a land dispute. That is an annihilationist ideology. And while I do not believe this is America’s war to fight, I do believe — with every fiber of my being — that it is Israel’s right, and moral duty, to defend her people.

Criticism of military tactics is fair. That’s not antisemitism. But denying Israel’s right to exist, or excusing — even celebrating — the barbarity of Hamas? That’s something far darker.

We saw it on October 7th — the face of evil itself. Women and children slaughtered. Babies burned alive. Innocent people raped and dragged through the streets. And now, to see our own fellow citizens march in defense of that evil… that is nothing short of a moral collapse.

If the chants in our streets were, “Hamas, return the hostages — Israel, stop the bombing,” we could have a conversation.

But that’s not what we hear.

What we hear is open sympathy for genocidal hatred. And that is a chasm — not just from decency, but from humanity itself. And here lies the danger: that same hatred is taking root here — in Dearborn, in London, in Paris — not as horror, but as heroism. If we are not vigilant, the enemy Israel faces today will be the enemy the free world faces tomorrow.

This isn’t about politics. It’s about truth. It’s about the courage to call evil by its name and to say “Never again” — and mean it.

And you don’t have to open a Bible to understand this. But if you do — if you are a believer — then this issue cuts even deeper. Because the question becomes: what did God promise, and does He keep His word?

He told Abraham, “I will bless those who bless you, and curse those who curse you.” He promised to make Abraham the father of many nations and to give him “the whole land of Canaan.” And though Abraham had other sons, God reaffirmed that promise through Isaac. And then again through Isaac’s son, Jacob — Israel — saying: “The land I gave to Abraham and Isaac I give to you and to your descendants after you.”

That’s an everlasting promise.

And from those descendants came a child — born in Bethlehem — who claimed to be the Savior of the world. Jesus never rejected His title as “son of David,” the great King of Israel.

He said plainly that He came “for the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” And when He returns, Scripture says He will return as “the Lion of the tribe of Judah.” And where do you think He will go? Back to His homeland — Israel.

Tamir Kalifa / Stringer | Getty Images

And what will He find when He gets there? His brothers — or his brothers’ enemies? Will the roads where He once walked be preserved? Or will they lie in rubble, as Gaza does today? If what He finds looks like the aftermath of October 7th, then tell me — what will be my defense as a Christian?

Some Christians argue that God’s promises to Israel have been transferred exclusively to the Church. I don’t believe that. But even if you do, then ask yourself this: if we’ve inherited the promises, do we not also inherit the land? Can we claim the birthright and then, like Esau, treat it as worthless when the world tries to steal it?

So, when terrorists come to slaughter Israelis simply for living in the land promised to Abraham, will we stand by? Or will we step forward — into the line of fire — and say,

“Take me instead”?

Because this is not just about Israel’s right to exist.

It’s about whether we still know the difference between good and evil.

It’s about whether we still have the courage to stand where God stands.

And if we cannot — if we will not — then maybe the question isn’t whether Israel will survive. Maybe the question is whether we will.

When did Americans start cheering for chaos?

MATHIEU LEWIS-ROLLAND / Contributor | Getty Images

Every time we look away from lawlessness, we tell the next mob it can go a little further.

Chicago, Portland, and other American cities are showing us what happens when the rule of law breaks down. These cities have become openly lawless — and that’s not hyperbole.

When a governor declares she doesn’t believe federal agents about a credible threat to their lives, when Chicago orders its police not to assist federal officers, and when cartels print wanted posters offering bounties for the deaths of U.S. immigration agents, you’re looking at a country flirting with anarchy.

Two dangers face us now: the intimidation of federal officers and the normalization of soldiers as street police. Accept either, and we lose the republic.

This isn’t a matter of partisan politics. The struggle we’re watching now is not between Democrats and Republicans. It’s between good and evil, right and wrong, self‑government and chaos.

Moral erosion

For generations, Americans have inherited a republic based on law, liberty, and moral responsibility. That legacy is now under assault by extremists who openly seek to collapse the system and replace it with something darker.

Antifa, well‑financed by the left, isn’t an isolated fringe any more than Occupy Wall Street was. As with Occupy, big money and global interests are quietly aligned with “anti‑establishment” radicals. The goal is disruption, not reform.

And they’ve learned how to condition us. Twenty‑five years ago, few Americans would have supported drag shows in elementary schools, biological males in women’s sports, forced vaccinations, or government partnerships with mega‑corporations to decide which businesses live or die. Few would have tolerated cartels threatening federal agents or tolerated mobs doxxing political opponents. Yet today, many shrug — or cheer.

How did we get here? What evidence convinced so many people to reverse themselves on fundamental questions of morality, liberty, and law? Those long laboring to disrupt our republic have sought to condition people to believe that the ends justify the means.

Promoting “tolerance” justifies women losing to biological men in sports. “Compassion” justifies harboring illegal immigrants, even violent criminals. Whatever deluded ideals Antifa espouses is supposed to somehow justify targeting federal agents and overturning the rule of law. Our culture has been conditioned for this moment.

The buck stops with us

That’s why the debate over using troops to restore order in American cities matters so much. I’ve never supported soldiers executing civilian law, and I still don’t. But we need to speak honestly about what the Constitution allows and why. The Posse Comitatus Act sharply limits the use of the military for domestic policing. The Insurrection Act, however, exists for rare emergencies — when federal law truly can’t be enforced by ordinary means and when mobs, cartels, or coordinated violence block the courts.

Even then, the Constitution demands limits: a public proclamation ordering offenders to disperse, transparency about the mission, a narrow scope, temporary duration, and judicial oversight.

Soldiers fight wars. Cops enforce laws. We blur that line at our peril.

But we also cannot allow intimidation of federal officers or tolerate local officials who openly obstruct federal enforcement. Both extremes — lawlessness on one side and militarization on the other — endanger the republic.

The only way out is the Constitution itself. Protect civil liberty. Enforce the rule of law. Demand transparency. Reject the temptation to justify any tactic because “our side” is winning. We’ve already seen how fear after 9/11 led to the Patriot Act and years of surveillance.

KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

Two dangers face us now: the intimidation of federal officers and the normalization of soldiers as street police. Accept either, and we lose the republic. The left cannot be allowed to shut down enforcement, and the right cannot be allowed to abandon constitutional restraint.

The real threat to the republic isn’t just the mobs or the cartels. It’s us — citizens who stop caring about truth and constitutional limits. Anything can be justified when fear takes over. Everything collapses when enough people decide “the ends justify the means.”

We must choose differently. Uphold the rule of law. Guard civil liberties. And remember that the only way to preserve a government of, by, and for the people is to act like the people still want it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.