Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
Shop
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Get the Duct Tape: This DIY Demo Will Teach You EXACTLY How to Add a Chainsaw to Your AR-15

November 09, 2017
Jon Boldt

Writer

As if the mainstream media hadn't already proven how gun-illiterate they are, USA Today decided to push the envelope and go all-in on the gun insanity.

In a tweet Wednesday afternoon, USA Today shared a video showing "common" and "rare" modifications to an AR-15 rifle that would turn your Walmart Special into a video game-esque, zombie-hunting chainsaw-shotgun-laser-hybrid from your worst nightmare.

Check out the tweet:

When he first saw the video, Glenn said he thought it was a joke and reacted accordingly.

"So when I saw the chainsaw bayonet, first of all, I was like, I’ve got to get me one of them," Glenn said on radio Thursday. "The second thing that I thought of is this: the people that are telling you that guns are evil are so disconnected from reality, that they actually think that there is a movement to attach chainsaw to AR's."

He then proceeded with a little DIY gun-modification project of his own. Stu captured the moment on Facebook Live.

Here it is for your viewing pleasure:

Maybe Glenn and Stu didn't get it quite right. Have a suggestion for them? Share your favorite modification ideas in the comments section below.

GLENN: So I saw something yesterday I thought had to be joke. It's really not.

STU: Yeah. Because you seem to be joking a lot so far in the show.

GLENN: I know. I know.

STU: You're mocking people who were screaming helplessly at the sky. But what are you supposed to do in a culture that allows legal chain saw bayonets on their guns?

GLENN: Right! Am I right?

STU: Right? And you might think it's a joke. You might think it's some silly thing. I don't know. But, I mean, I can tell you this. It scared the hell out of me when I saw it yesterday from USA Today.

GLENN: Okay. So USA Today put out a video of all of the attachments. Like a flash light. Good God, you could put a flash flight on the end of a gun. Why would someone ever need something like that?

STU: It's almost as if you'd want to see where the bullets were going.

GLENN: See what's in front of you. It's crazy these -- then they showed a laser site.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Hello. Does anybody remember Dr. Evil? What was he putting at the top of sharks' heads? Lasers.

STU: So that is really -- they actually did do this video, if you haven't seen it. First, they go through the actual attachments that were on the gun, that the shooter used. Then they go through some other possible attachments that are available.

GLENN: That are available.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: And people do this, they put lasers on their guns.

STU: It says possible modifications. One hundred round drum magazine. They also have a shotgun attachment.

GLENN: A shotgun attachment.

STU: So you had attach another shotgun below the gun.

GLENN: A shotgun attachment, now, that is not something I've seen before. But if it's in USA Today, it's a shotgun attachment. I get that.

STU: And, of course, most terrifying is the chain saw baneet.

GLENN: Don't even say that out loud.

STU: Well, I unfortunately have. So it's impossible to stop now.

GLENN: I wish you hadn't. Because once people get the idea that this is available, that you can go out in a store and you can buy an attachment for your AR, and it's a chain saw and you just mount that chain saw underneath the barrel so it's -- it's a chain saw bayonet. My gosh, do you know the kind of carnage?

STU: Oh, my gosh. Everyone is going to have one by the end of the week. And that's what's terrifying to me. You know, I used to be for the Second Amendment. Then chain saw bayonet.

GLENN: So now let me just say that I don't think -- and I'm doing something at 5 o'clock tonight that I believe -- we're going to take you through the fantasy land that Hollywood lives in. Because I don't think that they can find the difference between truth and fiction. I really -- you know, it's like these actors who are like, well, when I was climbing the -- the Himalayas with HEP Niblick. With who?

He was my Sherpa guy. That was a movie, man. That was a movie. And they have no idea the difference between real life and movies and fiction. George Takei yesterday tweeted out how in the United Federation of Planets, they had universal health care.

George, I want you to -- I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but the United Federation of Planets, doesn't exist. It's a TV show.

STU: It's also movies.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: So...

GLENN: So.

STU: Back up. Second source there. That's how it works, right?

GLENN: When you're right, you're right.

So when I saw the chain saw bayonet --

STU: Hmm. Terrifying.

GLENN: First of all, I was like, I've got to get me one of them.

STU: I actually think I do want one if they exist.

GLENN: And then the second thing that I thought of is this -- the people that are telling you that guns are evil are so disconnected from reality, that they actually think that there is a movement to attach chain saw to ARs. That that is something -- you know, I'm --

STU: I'm going to Cabela's.

GLENN: I'm going to Cabela's. I'm just going to grab a chain saw attachment, honey. I'll be right back.

STU: That's like a totally normal thing to them.

GLENN: Right. That they would attach them. And they would -- it's ridiculous to believe. So we started to look into it. The gun exists. And I have it.

STU: You do? And this is -- by the way, do not try this at home. Because this is a very dangerous weapon.

GLENN: This is the actual gun, that they are basing -- and I'm not kidding you. This is the gun that they're basing that attachment on. And as you see, Stu, I don't want to point it to you.

STU: Please don't. It's very scary.

GLENN: I'm putting it at the camera. You will see that this is an AR.

STU: Oh, my gosh. I don't know if it's an actual --

GLENN: And right underneath it's a chain saw.

STU: Now, some would say that potentially, that gun seems to come from the video game games of war -- Gears of War.

GLENN: That's what some would say. What's the difference between real life and a video game?

STU: Apparently to many in the media, nothing.

GLENN: Exactly right. Exactly right.

This is from the video game --

STU: And a lot of people actually think that's where they got that idea. It's a popular video game from the '90s.

GLENN: Where else would you get that idea? Have you ever heard of that?

STU: I've never heard of that. There's a few YouTubers who have sort of jokingly attached, you know, chain saws to guns. I guess they then use the chain saw. But it's not like it's an actual functional thing. There's no reason --

GLENN: Oh, my gosh, Stu, you are so stupid. I am going to -- you know what, could we get -- here, here, I got it. I got it.

I brought in a few things today.

STU: He brought in a few things, he's across the room now.

GLENN: So I brought in the AR.

STU: Okay. Be careful with that.

GLENN: Okay. All right.

Yeah, no, I know. I brought the AR in. And I brought in a chain saw.

STU: That's a -- and a real chain saw.

GLENN: So I have the AR and the chain saw.

Wait a minute. I've got more.

I also have a shotgun.

STU: Right.

GLENN: Handgun. And some duct tape.

Now, I am -- I am of the mindset.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: That USA Today was on to something.

And I believe that we need to make one of these.

So could we -- is Jason around?

Come here, Jason. Jason is our -- today in-house weapons expert.

Now, Jason, what I would like to do is first I would like to take the AR. And it is unloaded and safe.

I would like you to take the AR, and we want to attach the chain saw right here. Come here. We want to attach the chain saw. Now, I'm left-hand. So I'm going to be shooting like this. So I would like the chain saw right here, so I can -- you know what I mean? So I think it should be like that. Because that's --

STU: Wait. That's not how the design is on the actual chain saw bayonet. The chain saw bayonet from USA Today has it underneath.

GLENN: You know, you can go -- you can go with that. Sure, you can do that.

STU: I have the schematic right here.

GLENN: Yeah, well, I don't want it that way. I want it right there.

STU: You want it on the side basically?

GLENN: They have it like this. Yeah, because I want it on the side. Because I want to be able to chop their heads off.

STU: Wait. The concept of this would be you would shoot the person.

GLENN: You would shoot the person and then you would chop their heads off.

STU: After you've shot them?

GLENN: Sure.

STU: Why would you want -- what's the purpose of chopping their heads off after you've already --

GLENN: Because then there's dead, and then there's, that was sick.

STU: So straight out bloodlust?

GLENN: Oh, yeah.

STU: Making sure.

GLENN: Are you a member of the NRA?

STU: I'm not. So maybe I don't understand real blood lust.

GLENN: Yeah. It's just every member of the NRA knows, I want to shoot something, and then I want to take a chain saw and just hack it up.

STU: Really? Because the guy who was an NRA instructor who stopped the shooting.

GLENN: Yeah, he used one of these.

STU: He used the if one, not the chain saw.

GLENN: Yeah, he used the AR. ARs have to be removed only when killing people.

STU: Right.

GLENN: Except he didn't kill him. He wounded him and stopped the slaughter with his AR. But pay no attention to that. You know, because he didn't kill him.

STU: A lot of people aren't paying attention to him, it seems like.

GLENN: Yeah. So he had just the AR. But I'm going to have the AR with just the attachment. Okay? So can we work on that right now? Can you just take that over there? Because I'd got some other attachments that I would like to add to it as well.

For instance, Stu, what is this?

STU: Well, that's a knife.

GLENN: A knife. What kind of knife is it?

STU: I would say steak knife.

GLENN: That's what you would think.

STU: Looks like a steak knife to me. Is that what it is?

GLENN: Yeah. That's it. Just a regular knife.

I don't want you to freak out. I don't want you to freak out.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: But what is this?

STU: That appears to be another knife.

GLENN: Another knife.

STU: It's slightly larger. It's like a butcher knife. Not quite --

GLENN: So a butcher knife. Okay.

You don't see the difference here?

Besides the size. Oh, my gosh.

STU: What's the -- it looks like --

GLENN: What is this?

STU: That's like a butcher knife.

GLENN: That's a butcher knife, right?

STU: That's a butcher knife. Regular butcher knife, right?

STU: Yes.

GLENN: Does it make you afraid.

STU: No, we have them --

GLENN: What's this?

STU: Basically a butcher knife. I don't know the exact at the table term of that knife.

GLENN: But it makes you afraid?

STU: No.

GLENN: Yes, it does.

STU: It does?

GLENN: This one is spray-painted black. (?) this is a tabling knife. This is a steak knife. This doesn't make you afraid. This doesn't make you afraid. But I spray pained this one black, so it's now a tactical knife.

Don't you --

STU: But would they all be sharp and dangerous and stab you in the same --

GLENN: Yeah, but this one is more frightening.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: I come at you with this.

STU: Oh, that's just a normal silver knife.

GLENN: He's just going to come at me and maybe we're going to butcher some meat together. I believe at you with this, (?), but I come at you with this, and you know I have deadly intent.

STU: That's true.

GLENN: And I'm a serial killer.

STU: Right. Because it's painted.

GLENN: It's pained black.

STU: Okay. Now I'm getting it. (?)

GLENN: Good. We need to put the tactical knife. I was thinking, if we put -- except, I don't like the look of the tactical (?)

STU: It's just silver.

GLENN: No, it's just silver.

STU: That part is just scary.

GLENN: That part is scary. If I came (?) then you would be terrified.

STU: But you had the barrel.

GLENN: As soon as I put the barrel, and you see it's silver, you're like --

STU: It's not a big deal. By the way, that is essentially the subscription of the new Feinstein bill. It's basically her new (?) is it a black weapon? Then it must be banned.

GLENN: Wow. Racist. Listen to the racism.

STU: That's typical progressives.

GLENN: Hey, can I have some of that duct tape. Because I'm going to show you here at home, if you happen to be listening, you can go to TheBlaze TV and capture this sometimes later today, in case you want to make some of this yourself. But I'll try to be very descriptive on radio. But, again, if you can't follow this, and you want to get this exactly right --

STU: And we're getting this live on Facebook. Stu Burguiere on Facebook. (?) you can see this happen.

GLENN: You take a Smith & Wesson here. Okay? Regular Smith and resin. Because I can carry this. I'm going to show you how to make a concealed weapon with an at home attachment to make it a little more sick.

STU: Oh, my gosh. And this is legal, right?

GLENN: Oh, this is totally legal. Totally legal.

STU: Because the NRA. The freaking NRA.

GLENN: We'll do that just a second. (?)

STU: No, it's just silver.

GLENN: We'll go through all this. Because I'm an NRA member. And I know. And we'll also show you the finished product of the real chain saw AR coming up in a second.

Glenn Beck: Here's what's WRONG with conservatism today

Getty Images / Handout | Getty Images

What does it mean to be a conservative in 2025? Glenn offers guidance on what conservatives need to do to ensure the conservative movement doesn't fade into oblivion. We have to get back to PRINCIPLES, not policies.

To be a conservative in 2025 means to STAND

  • for Stewardship, protecting the wisdom of our Founders;
  • for Truth, defending objective reality in an age of illusion;
  • for Accountability, living within our means as individuals and as a nation;
  • for Neighborhood, rebuilding family, faith, and local community;
  • and for Duty, carrying freedom forward to the next generation.

A conservative doesn’t cling to the past — he stands guard over the principles that make the future possible.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You know, I'm so tired of being against everything. Saying what we're not.

It's time that we start saying what we are. And it's hard, because we're changing. It's different to be a conservative, today, than it was, you know, years ago.

And part of that is just coming from hard knocks. School of hard knocks. We've learned a lot of lessons on things we thought we were for. No, no, no.

But conservatives. To be a conservative, it shouldn't be about policies. It's really about principles. And that's why we've lost our way. Because we've lost our principles. And it's easy. Because the world got easy. And now the world is changing so rapidly. The boundaries between truth and illusion are blurred second by second. Machines now think. Currencies falter. Families fractured. And nations, all over the world, have forgotten who they are.

So what does it mean to be a conservative now, in 2025, '26. For a lot of people, it means opposing the left. That's -- that's a reaction. That's not renewal.

That's a reaction. It can't mean also worshiping the past, as if the past were perfect. The founders never asked for that.

They asked that we would preserve the principles and perfect their practice. They knew it was imperfect. To make a more perfect nation.

Is what we're supposed to be doing.

2025, '26 being a conservative has to mean stewardship.

The stewardship of a nation, of a civilization.

Of a moral inheritance. That is too precious to abandon.

What does it mean to conserve? To conserve something doesn't mean to stand still.

It means to stand guard. It means to defend what the Founders designed. The separation of powers. The rule of law.

The belief that our rights come not from kings or from Congress, but from the creator himself.
This is a system that was not built for ease. It was built for endurance, and it will endure if we only teach it again!

The problem is, we only teach it like it's a museum piece. You know, it's not a museum piece. It's not an old dusty document. It's a living covenant between the dead, the living and the unborn.

So this chapter of -- of conservatism. Must confront reality. Economic reality.

Global reality.

And moral reality.

It's not enough just to be against something. Or chant tax cuts or free markets.

We have to ask -- we have to start with simple questions like freedom, yes. But freedom for what?

Freedom for economic sovereignty. Your right to produce and to innovate. To build without asking Beijing's permission. That's a moral issue now.

Another moral issue: Debt! It's -- it's generational theft. We're spending money from generations we won't even meet.

And dependence. Another moral issue. It's a national weakness.

People cannot stand up for themselves. They can't make it themselves. And we're encouraging them to sit down, shut up, and don't think.

And the conservative who can't connect with fiscal prudence, and connect fiscal prudence to moral duty, you're not a conservative at all.

Being a conservative today, means you have to rebuild an economy that serves liberty, not one that serves -- survives by debt, and then there's the soul of the nation.

We are living through a time period. An age of dislocation. Where our families are fractured.

Our faith is almost gone.

Meaning is evaporating so fast. Nobody knows what meaning of life is. That's why everybody is killing themselves. They have no meaning in life. And why they don't have any meaning, is truth itself is mocked and blurred and replaced by nothing, but lies and noise.

If you want to be a conservative, then you have to be to become the moral compass that reminds a lost people, liberty cannot survive without virtue.

That freedom untethered from moral order is nothing, but chaos!

And that no app, no algorithm, no ideology is ever going to fill the void, where meaning used to live!

To be a conservative, moving forward, we cannot just be about policies.

We have to defend the sacred, the unseen, the moral architecture, that gives people an identity. So how do you do that? Well, we have to rebuild competence. We have to restore institutions that actually work. Just in the last hour, this monologue on what we're facing now, because we can't open the government.

Why can't we open the government?

Because government is broken. Why does nobody care? Because education is broken.

We have to reclaim education, not as propaganda, but as the formation of the mind and the soul. Conservatives have to champion innovation.

Not to imitate Silicon Valley's chaos, but to harness technology in defense of human dignity. Don't be afraid of AI.

Know what it is. Know it's a tool. It's a tool to strengthen people. As long as you always remember it's a tool. Otherwise, you will lose your humanity to it!

That's a conservative principle. To be a conservative, we have to restore local strength. Our families are the basic building blocks, our schools, our churches, and our charities. Not some big, distant NGO that was started by the Tides Foundation, but actual local charities, where you see people working. A web of voluntary institutions that held us together at one point. Because when Washington fails, and it will, it already has, the neighborhood has to stand.

Charlie Kirk was doing one thing that people on our side were not doing. Speaking to the young.

But not in nostalgia.

Not in -- you know, Reagan, Reagan, Reagan.

In purpose. They don't remember. They don't remember who Dick Cheney was.

I was listening to Fox news this morning, talking about Dick Cheney. And there was somebody there that I know was not even born when Dick Cheney. When the World Trade Center came down.

They weren't even born. They were telling me about Dick Cheney.

And I was like, come on. Come on. Come on.

If you don't remember who Dick Cheney was, how are you going to remember 9/11. How will you remember who Reagan was.

That just says, that's an old man's creed. No, it's not.

It's the ultimate timeless rebellion against tyranny in all of its forms. Yes, and even the tyranny of despair, which is eating people alive!

We need to redefine ourselves. Because we have changed, and that's a good thing. The creed for a generation, that will decide the fate of the republic, is what we need to find.

A conservative in 2025, '26.

Is somebody who protects the enduring principles of American liberty and self-government.

While actively stewarding the institutions. The culture. The economy of this nation!

For those who are alive and yet to be unborn.

We have to be a group of people that we're not anchored in the past. Or in rage! But in reason. And morality. Realism. And hope for the future.

We're the stewards! We're the ones that have to relight the torch, not just hold it. We didn't -- we didn't build this Torch. We didn't make this Torch. We're the keepers of the flame, but we are honor-bound to pass that forward, and conservatives are viewed as people who just live in the past. We're not here to merely conserve the past, but to renew it. To sort it. What worked, what didn't work. We're the ones to say to the world, there's still such a thing as truth. There's still such a thing as virtue. You can deny it all you want.

But the pain will only get worse. There's still such a thing as America!

And if now is not the time to renew America. When is that time?

If you're not the person. If we're not the generation to actively stand and redefine and defend, then who is that person?

We are -- we are supposed to preserve what works.

That -- you know, I was writing something this morning.

I was making notes on this. A constitutionalist is for restraint. A progressive, if you will, for lack of a better term, is for more power.

Progressives want the government to have more power.

Conservatives are for more restraint.

But the -- for the American eagle to fly, we must have both wings.

And one can't be stronger than the other.

We as a conservative, are supposed to look and say, no. Don't look at that. The past teaches us this, this, and this. So don't do that.

We can't do that. But there are these things that we were doing in the past, that we have to jettison. And maybe the other side has a good idea on what should replace that. But we're the ones who are supposed to say, no, but remember the framework.

They're -- they can dream all they want.
They can come up with all these utopias and everything else, and we can go, "That's a great idea."

But how do we make it work with this framework? Because that's our job. The point of this is, it takes both. It takes both.

We have to have the customs and the moral order. And the practices that have stood the test of time, in trial.

We -- we're in an amazing, amazing time. Amazing time.

We live at a time now, where anything -- literally anything is possible!

I don't want to be against stuff. I want to be for the future. I want to be for a rich, dynamic future. One where we are part of changing the world for the better!

Where more people are lifted out of poverty, more people are given the freedom to choose, whatever it is that they want to choose, as their own government and everything.

I don't want to force it down anybody's throat.

We -- I am so excited to be a shining city on the hill again.

We have that opportunity, right in front of us!

But not in we get bogged down in hatred, in division.

Not if we get bogged down into being against something.

We must be for something!

I know what I'm for.

Do you?

From Pharaoh to Hamas: The same spirit of evil, new disguise

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

The drone footage out of Gaza isn’t just war propaganda — it’s a glimpse of the same darkness that once convinced men they were righteous for killing innocents.

Evil introduces itself subtly. It doesn’t announce, “Hi, I’m here to destroy you.” It whispers. It flatters. It borrows the language of justice, empathy, and freedom, twisting them until hatred sounds righteous and violence sounds brave.

We are watching that same deception unfold again — in the streets, on college campuses, and in the rhetoric of people who should know better. It’s the oldest story in the world, retold with new slogans.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage.

A drone video surfaced this week showing Hamas terrorists staging the “discovery” of a hostage’s body. They pushed a corpse out of a window, dragged it into a hole, buried it, and then called in aid workers to “find” what they themselves had planted. It was theater — evil, disguised as victimhood. And it was caught entirely on camera.

That’s how evil operates. It never comes in through the front door. It sneaks in, often through manipulative pity. The same spirit animates the moral rot spreading through our institutions — from the halls of universities to the chambers of government.

Take Zohran Mamdani, a New York assemblyman who has praised jihadists and defended pro-Hamas agitators. His father, a Columbia University professor, wrote that America and al-Qaeda are morally equivalent — that suicide bombings shouldn’t be viewed as barbaric. Imagine thinking that way after watching 3,000 Americans die on 9/11. That’s not intellectualism. That’s indoctrination.

Often, that indoctrination comes from hostile foreign actors, peddled by complicit pawns on our own soil. The pro-Hamas protests that erupted across campuses last year, for example, were funded by Iran — a regime that murders its own citizens for speaking freely.

Ancient evil, new clothes

But the deeper danger isn’t foreign money. It’s the spiritual blindness that lets good people believe resentment is justice and envy is discernment. Scripture talks about the spirit of Amalek — the eternal enemy of God’s people, who attacks the weak from behind while the strong look away. Amalek never dies; it just changes its vocabulary and form with the times.

Today, Amalek tweets. He speaks through professors who defend terrorism as “anti-colonial resistance.” He preaches from pulpits that call violence “solidarity.” And he recruits through algorithms, whispering that the Jews control everything, that America had it coming, that chaos is freedom. Those are ancient lies wearing new clothes.

When nations embrace those lies, it’s not the Jews who perish first. It’s the nations themselves. The soul dies long before the body. The ovens of Auschwitz didn’t start with smoke; they started with silence and slogans.

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

A time for choosing

So what do we do? We speak truth — calmly, firmly, without venom. Because hatred can’t kill hatred; it only feeds it. Truth, compassion, and courage starve it to death.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage. That’s how Amalek survives — by making you fight him with his own weapons. The only victory that lasts is moral clarity without malice, courage without cruelty.

The war we’re fighting isn’t new. It’s the same battle between remembrance and amnesia, covenant and chaos, humility and pride. The same spirit that whispered to Pharaoh, to Hitler, and to every mob that thought hatred could heal the world is whispering again now — on your screens, in your classrooms, in your churches.

Will you join it, or will you stand against it?

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Bill Gates ends climate fear campaign, declares AI the future ruler

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The Big Tech billionaire once said humanity must change or perish. Now he claims we’ll survive — just as elites prepare total surveillance.

For decades, Americans have been told that climate change is an imminent apocalypse — the existential threat that justifies every intrusion into our lives, from banning gas stoves to rationing energy to tracking personal “carbon scores.”

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates helped lead that charge. He warned repeatedly that the “climate disaster” would be the greatest crisis humanity would ever face. He invested billions in green technology and demanded the world reach net-zero emissions by 2050 “to avoid catastrophe.”

The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch.

Now, suddenly, he wants everyone to relax: Climate change “will not lead to humanity’s demise” after all.

Gates was making less of a scientific statement and more of a strategic pivot. When elites retire a crisis, it’s never because the threat is gone — it’s because a better one has replaced it. And something else has indeed arrived — something the ruling class finds more useful than fear of the weather.The same day Gates downshifted the doomsday rhetoric, Amazon announced it would pay warehouse workers $30 an hour — while laying off 30,000 people because artificial intelligence will soon do their jobs.

Climate panic was the warm-up. AI control is the main event.

The new currency of power

The world once revolved around oil and gas. Today, it revolves around the electricity demanded by server farms, the chips that power machine learning, and the data that can be used to manipulate or silence entire populations. The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch. Whoever controls energy now controls information. And whoever controls information controls civilization.

Climate alarmism gave elites a pretext to centralize power over energy. Artificial intelligence gives them a mechanism to centralize power over people. The future battles will not be about carbon — they will be about control.

Two futures — both ending in tyranny

Americans are already being pushed into what look like two opposing movements, but both leave the individual powerless.

The first is the technocratic empire being constructed in the name of innovation. In its vision, human work will be replaced by machines, and digital permissions will subsume personal autonomy.

Government and corporations merge into a single authority. Your identity, finances, medical decisions, and speech rights become access points monitored by biometric scanners and enforced by automated gatekeepers. Every step, purchase, and opinion is tracked under the noble banner of “efficiency.”

The second is the green de-growth utopia being marketed as “compassion.” In this vision, prosperity itself becomes immoral. You will own less because “the planet” requires it. Elites will redesign cities so life cannot extend beyond a 15-minute walking radius, restrict movement to save the Earth, and ration resources to curb “excess.” It promises community and simplicity, but ultimately delivers enforced scarcity. Freedom withers when surviving becomes a collective permission rather than an individual right.

Both futures demand that citizens become manageable — either automated out of society or tightly regulated within it. The ruling class will embrace whichever version gives them the most leverage in any given moment.

Climate panic was losing its grip. AI dependency — and the obedience it creates — is far more potent.

The forgotten way

A third path exists, but it is the one today’s elites fear most: the path laid out in our Constitution. The founders built a system that assumes human beings are not subjects to be monitored or managed, but moral agents equipped by God with rights no government — and no algorithm — can override.

Hesham Elsherif / Stringer | Getty Images

That idea remains the most “disruptive technology” in history. It shattered the belief that people need kings or experts or global committees telling them how to live. No wonder elites want it erased.

Soon, you will be told you must choose: Live in a world run by machines or in a world stripped down for planetary salvation. Digital tyranny or rationed equality. Innovation without liberty or simplicity without dignity.

Both are traps.

The only way

The only future worth choosing is the one grounded in ordered liberty — where prosperity and progress exist alongside moral responsibility and personal freedom and human beings are treated as image-bearers of God — not climate liabilities, not data profiles, not replaceable hardware components.

Bill Gates can change his tune. The media can change the script. But the agenda remains the same.

They no longer want to save the planet. They want to run it, and they expect you to obey.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Why the White House restoration sent the left Into panic mode

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Presidents have altered the White House for decades, yet only Donald Trump is treated as a vandal for privately funding the East Wing’s restoration.

Every time a president so much as changes the color of the White House drapes, the press clutches its pearls. Unless the name on the stationery is Barack Obama’s, even routine restoration becomes a national outrage.

President Donald Trump’s decision to privately fund upgrades to the White House — including a new state ballroom — has been met with the usual chorus of gasps and sneers. You’d think he bulldozed Monticello.

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s ‘visionary.’

The irony is that presidents have altered and expanded the White House for more than a century. President Franklin D. Roosevelt added the East and West Wings in the middle of the Great Depression. Newspapers accused him of building a palace while Americans stood in breadlines. History now calls it “vision.”

First lady Nancy Reagan faced the same hysteria. Headlines accused her of spending taxpayer money on new china “while Americans starved.” In truth, she raised private funds after learning that the White House didn’t have enough matching plates for state dinners. She took the ridicule and refused to pass blame.

“I’m a big girl,” she told her staff. “This comes with the job.” That was dignity — something the press no longer recognizes.

A restoration, not a renovation

Trump’s project is different in every way that should matter. It costs taxpayers nothing. Not a cent. The president and a few friends privately fund the work. There’s no private pool or tennis court, no personal perks. The additions won’t even be completed until after he leaves office.

What’s being built is not indulgence — it’s stewardship. A restoration of aging rooms, worn fixtures, and century-old bathrooms that no longer function properly in the people’s house. Trump has paid for cast brass doorknobs engraved with the presidential seal, restored the carpets and moldings, and ensured that the architecture remains faithful to history.

The media’s response was mockery and accusations of vanity. They call it “grotesque excess,” while celebrating billion-dollar “climate art” projects and funneling hundreds of millions into activist causes like the No Kings movement. They lecture America on restraint while living off the largesse of billionaires.

The selective guardians of history

Where was this sudden reverence for history when rioters torched St. John’s Church — the same church where every president since James Madison has worshipped? The press called it an “expression of grief.”

Where was that reverence when mobs toppled statues of Washington, Jefferson, and Grant? Or when first lady Melania Trump replaced the Rose Garden’s lawn with a patio but otherwise followed Jackie Kennedy’s original 1962 plans in the garden’s restoration? They called that “desecration.”

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s “visionary.”

The real desecration

The people shrieking about “historic preservation” care nothing for history. They hate the idea that something lasting and beautiful might be built by hands they despise. They mock craftsmanship because it exposes their own cultural decay.

The White House ballroom is not a scandal — it’s a mirror. And what it reflects is the media’s own pettiness. The ruling class that ridicules restoration is the same class that cheered as America’s monuments fell. Its members sneer at permanence because permanence condemns them.

Julia Beverly / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s improvements are an act of faith — in the nation’s symbols, its endurance, and its worth. The outrage over a privately funded renovation says less about him than it does about the journalists who mistake destruction for progress.

The real desecration isn’t happening in the East Wing. It’s happening in the newsrooms that long ago tore up their own foundation — truth — and never bothered to rebuild it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.