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

Did Dick Morris really deliberately mislead voters on the potential Romney victory?

November 14, 2012
Wilson

Writer

I was wrong about the election big‑time, big‑time wrong about the election. I'm always wrong on politics. You shouldn't listen to me on politics.  I don't get it. Quite honestly that's Rush's bag, that's Sean's bag. I can't tell you what to do on politics. I don't know why. I always feel good about my predictions and they're always wrong. And as I said last hour, I know about as much on politics as I do on salads. Not a lot. However, revolutionaries and things that are over the horizon I'm pretty darn good on. Knowing dirtbags, pretty good. I'm a trusting guy, believe it or not. I generally look for the good in people and that's what I generally see first, the good in people. And then I'm disappointed.

I want to talk to you about the truth and if it even matters in America anymore. For a lot of people it doesn't matter. They will say it matters but they don't want to look into it. They've lost their ability to think critically and to weigh things themselves. They will just be spoon‑fed something. That's the thing that anybody who's ‑‑ you know, I would like to invite members of the media to go ahead and do my job for a day. You do talk radio. I don't ‑‑ television, please. Television you sit in a big empty box by yourself surrounded by people who are producers who may agree or disagree with you but that's pretty much it. Talk radio, you have to face the music. Talk radio you're one on one: I'm talking to you, you're talking to me. You call me, write me, and I have to face the music. And I have to do it for three hours a day and I have to defend myself for three hours a day. I have to talk off the top of my head. I'm not reading a TelePrompTer. I'm telling you what I think. It's, this is the hardest job in all of media. Bar none. Quite honestly if I wanted to make my life a lot easier, I would quit radio. Because this is the hardest job. And I believe this is the hardest job not just that I do but in all of media. It's very difficult.

And the reason why it's difficult is because you cannot lie for three hours a day. You are who you are. And people see it. People see it. But you can lie in sound bites. But do people care about the truth? Or are we just spoon‑fed things?

For instance, do I just spoon‑feed you your opinions? If I do, please don't ever call yourself a fan of mine. I want you to think for yourself. I want you to see what I see and then say, "Well, I agree with that or I "I disagree with that" or "I don't know if that's even true. That can't be true." And you go and you research it yourself.

When I miss, I miss honestly. Now, I want you to listen to this whole monologue because I want you to understand what I'm saying about Dick Morris. Dick Morris as you probably know, he predicted pretty much the same thing that I predicted, but he was wrong. I was wrong. But I was wrong, and I believed it.

Last night I read a story on Politico that when Morris was asked about this, he told, he told the truth about why he predicted a Romney landslide. And I read it yesterday afternoon on the way home and I was ‑‑ it was disturbing. Stu and I were on the phone immediately, look at this. Look at this. And I gave him a long list of things that I said, I have to ‑‑ we have to talk to the American people about this. Moore said according to Politico that he only predicted a landslide because he wanted to help Romney.

There was a period of time when the Romney campaign was falling apart, people were not optimistic, nobody thought there was a chance of victory, and I felt that it was my duty at that point to go out and say what I said... - Dick Morris

Got it?  That's shocking.  He thought it was his duty to go out and say what he said because people didn't believe that Romney could win.  I'm reading the story from Politico and I cannot believe it.  He just wanted to help Romney?  It's one thing to be wrong.  It's another thing to knowingly lie to your audience.  It's another thing ‑‑ that is the opposite of TheBlaze.  The truth has no agenda.  I thought it was my duty to say these things.  Stay with me to the end of this monologue.

Now this is not the first time that I've seen major media figures admit that they will not tell the truth to their own audiences. I was told by a very well known and respected financial expert that he would not talk to me about financial collapse because, quote, it would make it more likely, even though he believed much of the stuff that I said was going to happen, he said we had a responsibility to never have that conversation on the air. I said, well, what happens if it does? You're telling people that it's okay, that everything's going to be all right, they won't be prepared. "Yes, but if we have that conversation, because we have credibility, then it's more likely that it will happen." Well, what are you talking about? Are you preparing? Are you bat nipping down the hatches? Are you being more cautious? Well, of course. Oh, but you want to go on the air and tell everybody, don't worry. We've seen this before.

I had another executive tell me that despite the fact that we all knew that what I was saying was true, quote: We have a responsibility to not tell the American people the truth. A responsibility to not tell the truth? Man, I'm ‑‑ I'm sorry. I seem to recall, I was told by somebody else that I have a responsibility to not lie. How was that worded to me? I think it was ‑‑ oh, yeah. Quote: Thou shalt not bear false witness. Thou shalt not lie. I don't care how big of an executive you are. I can guarantee the guy who wrote those ten safety tips has a bigger title than you do. Another big media mogul said to me, "Glenn, please. Let's stop playing this game. We both love the Constitution but we both know that sometimes you have to do what you have to do, end quote. No. What you have to do at all times is tell the truth. Trust your audience. Trust the American people to have some intelligence. Stop treating them like imbiciles because you're creating imbiciles. And loving the Constitution means always working to strengthen and honor the Constitution. Look, we all honor our marriage certificate, but sometimes guys do what they have to do. It strengthens the marriage." No, it doesn't.

So when I'm ‑‑ I'm thinking about all these things when I'm first reading the Politico. The latest example from Dick Morris, I read that quote and I thought to myself, "We're all wrong sometimes," and I can handle him being wrong. But what he's telling me here is that he knowingly lied to make me feel better and to help Romney. Thank God this guy's not an oncologist. We'd all be dead of cancer. We cannot tolerate this anymore. We must be able to trust the news, which brings me to my last point. Where I really stand on Dick Morris.

Again, here's the clip from Politico that we played a minute ago.

There was a period of time when the Romney campaign was falling apart, people were not optimistic, nobody thought there was a chance of victory.  And I felt that it was my duty at that point to go out and say what I said. 

That's what the Politico ran.  But listen to what the Politico didn't run immediately before and immediately after when we started to do our homework, we didn't take it from the Politico, just like you shouldn't take it just from me.  You should go back and look because apparently you can't trust anybody.  Listen to what Dick Morris actually said.

I called it as I saw it from the polling, and I did the best I could - and I also worked very hard for Romney. ... I spoke about what I believed, and I think that there was a period of time when the Romney campaign was falling apart, people were not optimistic, nobody thought there was a chance of victory. And I felt that it was my duty at that point to go out and say what I said. And at the time that I said it, I believe I was right. - Dick Morris, full quote

And at the time I said it, I believed I was right. There is no scandal here. Dick Morris is not lying to you. Dick Morris does not need, nor probably does he want me depending him. But what Politico did is absolutely inexcusable. You didn't have to take homework, you didn't have to stitch three speeches together. He said it before and he said it immediately after. You had to intentionally go in and try to -  you literally razor blade everything else out. You had to go in and tightly edit to be able to make him sound like he was saying something he wasn't saying.

Yesterday I called my business partner Chris Balfe who works for me and he runs ‑‑ he's my Roy Disney. He's the guy who is building the company. Walt had the ideas, but it was Roy that knew how to build the company. And I called him up and I said, how are you doing? He's up in New York. And he said, Glenn, I'm pushing the biggest damn rock up a hill I've ever tried to pull ‑‑ push. I said, we'll make it. He said, I know. What you've given me a task to do is you've said take a five‑year plan and collapse it to a one‑year plan. I don't know how to do that, Glenn. I know we could make it in five years and we're going to get to the end of this next year and we're going to say, damn it, we did it again. He said, but right now it's a heavy rock. I know. I know.

The reason why I've asked him to push that rock up, the reason why I've been asking you for your help and your tolerance and quite honestly the tolerance of talk radio stations is I believe this country is in real trouble and we're in trouble because the truth is not being reported. It's important. What you do every day is important. Your word is important. What you look into yourself is important.

You know there's a lot of ‑‑ there's a lot of program directors and a lot of people in the media and all over that think, "Oh, well, you know what? It's entertainment and we're here for ratings, we're here for money." The hell we are. The hell we are. If there isn't a reason for us to live at this time right now, if you don't understand what's happening to freedom right now, if you don't know what's happening in our country, "Oh, well, it's always been this way," I'm sorry. It hasn't been. I'm sorry. It hasn't been. Tonight I'm going to show you how it all ends. Tonight at 5:00 on TheBlaze I'll show you how it all ends and I'll show it to you with history in an episode you won't soon forget. 5:00 tonight.

We do these things because we believe in them. If you don't, that's fine. You can listen to us for the laughs or entertainment or whatever. That's fine. But we believe in it. And there are too many people in this industry that don't believe in it. They don't care. They're lazy, they're jaded. I don't know what it is. I'll just tell you this: TheBlaze wouldn't have half the success it's had so far if the media didn't hand‑deliver so many opportunities to show how easy it is to win when the truth is told. It's not that hard. The media is destroying itself and they are destroying our country and our children's future at the same time. You cannot exist as a free people if you cannot reason for yourself. You cannot exist as a free people if you don't know how to critically think. You cannot exist as a free people if you have a corrupt press. You cannot. It doesn't work.

The media is destroying itself on all fronts. It's on fire. But that's why this is called TheBlaze. It's a purifying fire. Stand in the flames of the truth. It will purify. And what is real will stand. What is not will burn itself out. We're happy to pick up the smoldering pieces and dust them off, after they've been purified and put them all back together. I know I'm wrong on politics. I'm not wrong on the direction of many things.

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

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

What Lee actually proposed

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

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

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

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

The Biden land-grab

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

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

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

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

Smith Collection/Gado / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

American families pay the price

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

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

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

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

Divide and conquer

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

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


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

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

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

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

Establish basic liability laws

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

Pass increased whistleblower protections

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

Prevent AI from having legal rights

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

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

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

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

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Operation Midnight Hammer

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

USAF / Handout | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

What comes next

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

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

That would be catastrophic.

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

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

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

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

Now we pray

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

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

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


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

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

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rising Islamism

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

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

Blending the worst ideologies

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

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

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

Call out radicalism

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

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

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.