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

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Elon Musk Debuts His Biggest Fully Electric Model Yet

November 17, 2017
Staff

WRITER

Tesla and SpaceX founder Elon Musk has unveiled a shiny new toy: a Tesla semi-truck that’s fully electric. Musk says the truck will go into production in 2019.

On today’s show, Glenn and Stu had to talk about Musk’s latest vehicle offerings. Along with the semi, Tesla introduced a second-generation Roadster that Musk vows will be the fastest production vehicle ever.

Glenn described what it’s like to ride in a Tesla, and Stu gave a satirical explanation of how electric vehicles are fueled.

“The good thing is the electricity that powers it actually comes from elves in the wall,” Stu said. “And they run on little hamster wheels and it generates the power. … These elves are organic.”

“They’re free-range elves,” Glenn jokingly added.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: Hello. Welcome to Friday.

I got a lot of things -- I got a lot of things that I want to talk about. You know, the Al Franken stuff. The tax cuts. But I would really like to talk about the new Elon Musk unveiling of the -- the semi-automated semi-truck yesterday and the roadster.

STU: Yeah. Let's be honest about it, it's all about the roadster. Who cares about the stupid truck?

GLENN: I actually care about the stupid truck. But --

STU: You know what, if I'm a trucker, I really do, because it could be one of those things. If you can get a long range without having to spend all the money on gas, there's --

GLENN: There's a lot to be gained there.

STU: And the good thing is, you know, the electricity that powers it actually comes from elves in the walls. And they run on little hampster wheels, and it generates the power.

GLENN: Not exactly. You know, it's so good for the environment.

STU: It is. Because this energy comes directly from these elves. And these elves are organic. They're grown in farms in -- in the Netherlands.

GLENN: Free-range elves.

STU: Free-range elves.

They're shipped over here. They go into your wall. They get in hampster wheels, and they run around. And that generates the electricity that powers these things.

GLENN: And they do not burp, they do not fart. So there's no gas coming from the elves.

STU: No. They don't need to be fed.

GLENN: Yeah. Now, a lot of people think that the electricity doesn't come from magic elves in the wall.

STU: Deniers? You're going to bring up deniers?

GLENN: I want to bring up deniers, just to show how stupid they are. They believe that the electricity that comes out of the wall, that you would plug your electric car into, you know, believes from some sort of coal-fired electricity. Or, you know, some plant that's just belching a lot of smoke in the air.

STU: A natural gas is part of the equation?

GLENN: Yeah. They think that you can dig up these little black rocks and then burn that. And it will make the elves' job nonexistent.

STU: Ridiculous. These pathetic people.

GLENN: These elf deniers.

STU: But I will say the roadsters, zero to 60 in 1.9 seconds.

GLENN: No car has ever gone 1.90 to 60. 2.0, I think is the fastest ever. And typical Elon Musk, he was just -- this is what we have in the prototype. Inferring that it's going to get better than that.

STU: Yeah. Now it doesn't come out until 2020. But you can put your 250 grand down now to get a Founders model, for when it comes out. You got to set aside the quarter mil, you know, for a few years, and that will give you not the car, but the opportunity to buy the car.

GLENN: Oh, wait. Wait. Wait.

STU: When they tell you what it costs.

GLENN: It doesn't go to the car?

STU: No. I mean, it's a down payment on the car, but you will still owe more money on the car.

GLENN: They have no idea how much it will cost yet.

STU: That's only for the Founders model. You can put $50,000 for a regular one. And I guess at that point, it's a couple hundred thousand. It's not going to be Bugatti level. Because the Bugatti Veyron -- you know, you can get into $2 million for that. That will do zero to 60 in 2.3, I think. So this is faster than that. They think the top speed will be around 250, which would be slower than the Bugatti.

GLENN: No, no, no. He said, I don't want to get into the top speed now, but it is over 250.

STU: Over 250. But you can get up to almost 300 in the Bugatti now. Electric cars are never going to be -- they're not going to compete necessarily as well at a top speed level, but they're faster, zero to 60. The things that you would actually use in a car are faster with the electric cars.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: You don't use 300 miles an hour. That's not a usable --

GLENN: Yeah, I would agree with that. But I don't know if I use zero to 60 in 1.9 either.

STU: Oh, absolutely. You can do that getting on the highway. You could do that -- when they brought them in here and test drove them, and one of my favorite things to do, which is really safe, by the way --

GLENN: Sure. Sure.

STU: -- is you -- you know how you get on the on-ramp? And what you do is you slowly accelerate it in traffic. That's certainly one way to go.

GLENN: Sure. Sure.

STU: Let me give you an alternate plan here.

GLENN: Okay. All right. Sure. All right.

STU: This is how I do. What you do is you know how sometimes let's say you were to spill cup of coffee, right?

GLENN: Yes.

STU: You would probably pull over to the side and stop.

GLENN: I wouldn't.

STU: Really? You would just keep going?

GLENN: No.

STU: Just let it sink into the carpet. Okay. So, you know, you drop something. Whatever. You need to make a phone call, something like that.

GLENN: Sure.

STU: Kids are acting up in the backseat. You pull over to the side of the road. So let's just say that happened on the on-ramp, for an undisclosed reason. And you were to stop on the side of the on-ramp. And things are clear around you. And you just kind of wait. And you look kind of behind you.

And you wait until a car going at full speed passes you, going 70 miles an hour, and then you mash on the gas pedal, which is not a gas pedal in this particular case, and you pass it before the end of the ramp. That's the sort of speed I'm talking about. Is legitimately how fast these things go. And it's incredible. Because it jerks you back like you're on a ridiculous six flags rollercoaster.

GLENN: People don't understand the constant acceleration. When you first drive a Tesla, it doesn't have a gearbox. It's constant acceleration. So you're expecting the (sound effect).

STU: It doesn't do that.

GLENN: It doesn't do that.

STU: No.

GLENN: And it's just constant. And it peels your eyes back. It really does. And this, I can't even imagine.

STU: And this, we've never driven one that's near that fast. The one we drove was like around 3 seconds, 2.9.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: But, I mean, anything under six seconds feels pretty fast. Like, if you get, I don't know, a decent Mustang, right? That you could buy from a Ford dealership is going to go somewhere under six seconds maybe. Under four seconds is like world class speed. Like, you're talking 600-horsepower. I mean, those are, you know, really, really like super cars, under four seconds.

Under two seconds is insanity.

GLENN: Yeah. Has never been done before.

STU: And Elon Musk is obsessed with Spaceballs.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: The movie Spaceballs. It's so weird.

GLENN: He said, if anybody is a fan of Spaceballs, you know that there's only one speed above ludicrous.

Now, ludicrous is the speed that you type on your screen of a Tesla. You pick the kind of -- you know, you want an economy speed or whatever.

STU: Yep.

GLENN: And you can ludicrous, which means, I don't care about how long the battery is going to last. I just want it to just go fast. So you hit ludicrous. And that's when you hit the top speeds. This one doesn't have ludicrous. This has economy, you know, highway --

STU: It still has the other ones from Spaceballs 2. And ludicrous speed was the fastest speed in Spaceballs, with one exception.

GLENN: With one exception, which is plaid. So this one has a setting of plaid.

STU: Plaid speed.

GLENN: I love his sense of humor.

STU: Yeah. I think there's a lot -- this audience when it comes to politics and talking about the environment, like, Elon Musk would be very annoying to talk to about these topics, because he wouldn't agree with us at all.

GLENN: Agree.

STU: But I like the idea that this guy is living the billionaire life the way I would live it. He's just like, you know what, I want a giant bank tube that goes from Los Angeles to San Francisco in four seconds. And then he just starts building it.

GLENN: Yeah. It's not just because he's a billionaire -- I mean, that helps. It is also because he's so super damn smart.

STU: It is that he's super smart, I will say. However --

GLENN: Come on. You listen to that guy, and he's like, no, of course, we all know that you can bore under somebody's house. And if you're 100 feet below, you can't feel anything. I mean, you know, you won't even notice that there's a whole highway underneath your -- you're like, what? No, I didn't know that.

STU: Right. You're parsing this thing in a way that's not making my point exactly. Because, yes, his ideas are better than mine. But my point is, if I had billions of dollars, I would try stupid crazy stuff.

GLENN: Yes. Okay. So he tries stupid stuff. But it wouldn't necessarily be successful.

STU: Right. They would probably fail all the time. And I think a lot of Elon Musk's ideas would fail, and that's okay. I mean, I don't know that his solar plans will be hugely successful. I know it's really important to him. He's tried a lot of crazy ideas. And not all of them have worked. Some of them may.

GLENN: You know, I'm going to build some solar panels. I'm also going to build a rocket ship and have it land again. When that one works, I kind of give you a pass on everything else. You know.

STU: What's the normal billionaire thing to do? I'm going to start a hedge fund.

GLENN: I'm going to build a wing on a hospital.

STU: Yeah. Those are all great goals. Right?

GLENN: Yeah, they're great.

STU: I'm going to find real estate to invest in.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Those are all fine. This guy is trying to make lasers.

GLENN: This is the first guy that has said, we're going to Mars. By Tuesday. By Tuesday, we're going to Mars.

STU: He may do it in the roadster too, which is kind of amazing.

GLENN: I know. So here's the audio. He rented a big aircraft hangar out in California, to introduce his new driverless truck. And at the end, the truck opened up. And a roadster drove out. Because he did the Steve Jobs thing. Oh, you know what, there's one more thing, I think. Open up the back of the truck.

And this roadster came out. The crowd went wild. This is him at the end of it, in full-fledged ludicrous mode for Elon Musk.

ELON: Six -- these numbers sound nutty, but they're real. 620-mile range. That's 1,000-kilometer range. This would be the first time an electric vehicle breaks 1,000-kilometer. A production electric vehicle will travel more than 1,000 kilometers in a single truck at highway speed.

But you're able to travel from LA to San Francisco and back at highway speed without recharging.

(applauding)

But the point of doing this is to just give a hard-core smackdown to gasoline parts.

GLENN: Unbelievable. Elon Musk.

We live in such an exciting time. We're just concentrating on all the wrong things. We're concentrating on all these scumbags.

EXCLUSIVE: Tech Ethicist reveals 5 ways to control AI NOW

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.

How private stewardship could REVIVE America’s wild

Jonathan Newton / Contributor | Getty Images

The left’s idea of stewardship involves bulldozing bison and barring access. Lee’s vision puts conservation back in the hands of the people.

The media wants you to believe that Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) is trying to bulldoze Yellowstone and turn national parks into strip malls — that he’s calling for a reckless fire sale of America’s natural beauty to line developers’ pockets. That narrative is dishonest. It’s fearmongering, and, by the way, it’s wrong.

Here’s what’s really happening.

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized.

The federal government currently owns 640 million acres of land — nearly 28% of all land in the United States. To put that into perspective, that’s more territory than France, Germany, Poland, and the United Kingdom combined.

Most of this land is west of the Mississippi River. That’s not a coincidence. In the American West, federal ownership isn’t just a bureaucratic technicality — it’s a stranglehold. States are suffocated. Locals are treated as tenants. Opportunities are choked off.

Meanwhile, people living east of the Mississippi — in places like Kentucky, Georgia, or Pennsylvania — might not even realize how little land their own states truly control. But the same policies that are plaguing the West could come for them next.

Lee isn’t proposing to auction off Yellowstone or pave over Yosemite. He’s talking about 3 million acres — that’s less than half of 1% of the federal estate. And this land isn’t your family’s favorite hiking trail. It’s remote, hard to access, and often mismanaged.

Failed management

Why was it mismanaged in the first place? Because the federal government is a terrible landlord.

Consider Yellowstone again. It’s home to the last remaining herd of genetically pure American bison — animals that haven’t been crossbred with cattle. Ranchers, myself included, would love the chance to help restore these majestic creatures on private land. But the federal government won’t allow it.

So what do they do when the herd gets too big?

They kill them. Bulldoze them into mass graves. That’s not conservation. That’s bureaucratic malpractice.

And don’t even get me started on bald eagles — majestic symbols of American freedom and a federally protected endangered species, now regularly slaughtered by wind turbines. I have pictures of piles of dead bald eagles. Where’s the outrage?

Biden’s federal land-grab

Some argue that states can’t afford to manage this land themselves. But if the states can’t afford it, how can Washington? We’re $35 trillion in debt. Entitlements are strained, infrastructure is crumbling, and the Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, and National Park Service are billions of dollars behind in basic maintenance. Roads, firebreaks, and trails are falling apart.

The Biden administration quietly embraced something called the “30 by 30” initiative, a plan to lock up 30% of all U.S. land and water under federal “conservation” by 2030. The real goal is 50% by 2050.

That entails half of the country being taken away from you, controlled not by the people who live there but by technocrats in D.C.

You think that won’t affect your ability to hunt, fish, graze cattle, or cut timber? Think again. It won’t be conservatives who stop you from building a cabin, raising cattle, or teaching your grandkids how to shoot a rifle. It’ll be the same radical environmentalists who treat land as sacred — unless it’s your truck, your deer stand, or your back yard.

Land as collateral

Moreover, the U.S. Treasury is considering putting federally owned land on the national balance sheet, listing your parks, forests, and hunting grounds as collateral.

What happens if America defaults on its debt?

David McNew / Stringer | Getty Images

Do you think our creditors won’t come calling? Imagine explaining to your kids that the lake you used to fish in is now under foreign ownership, that the forest you hunted in belongs to China.

This is not hypothetical. This is the logical conclusion of treating land like a piggy bank.

The American way

There’s a better way — and it’s the American way.

Let the people who live near the land steward it. Let ranchers, farmers, sportsmen, and local conservationists do what they’ve done for generations.

Did you know that 75% of America’s wetlands are on private land? Or that the most successful wildlife recoveries — whitetail deer, ducks, wild turkeys — didn’t come from Washington but from partnerships between private landowners and groups like Ducks Unlimited?

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized. When you break it, you fix it. When you profit from the land, you protect it.

This is not about selling out. It’s about buying in — to freedom, to responsibility, to the principle of constitutional self-governance.

So when you hear the pundits cry foul over 3 million acres of federal land, remember: We don’t need Washington to protect our land. We need Washington to get out of the way.

Because this isn’t just about land. It’s about liberty. And once liberty is lost, it doesn’t come back easily.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.