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

Dan Liljenquist forces Orrin Hatch into primary in Utah

April 23, 2012
Wilson

Writer

This weekend, Orrin Hatch was forced into a primary race for his Senate seat in Utah when he failed to gain 60% of the convention votes he needed in order to secure the nomination. Many conservatives in Utah, especially among the Tea Party, see Hatch as having served too long - a total of six terms. He first assumed office in 1977, and is the longest-serving Senator in Utah history. Tea Party groups are rallying around Dan Liljenquist, a candidate that Glenn has also expressed support for - although not endorsed. On radio this morning, Glenn invited FreedomWorks' Matt Kibbe (a sponsor of The Glenn Beck Program) on to the show to discuss the upset.

Rush Transcript Below:

GLENN:  Two years ago Freedom Works and Tea Party activists in Utah defeated Robert Bennett, an 18‑year incumbent on the floor of the state convention delegates chanted TARP, TARP, TARP because of his support for $700 billion in financial bailouts.  This year Hatch's challenger Dan Liljenquist can ‑‑ I mean, I kind of hope that he doesn't win just because I don't want to say his name over and over. 

 

STU:  Change your name to Smith. 

 

GLENN:  Yeah.  Rallied activists on the convention floor saying, "No senator is too big to fail."  Matt Kibbe ‑‑ this was not supposed to happen.  Matt Kibbe is from Freedom Works.  He's on the phone with us now.  Matt, Matt? 

 

KIBBE:  Yes.  Yes, I am here, I am here. 

 

GLENN:  This was not supposed to happen.  Orrin Hatch hasn't faced a primary in 36 years. 

 

KIBBE:  And he is a little steamed about it, too. 

 

GLENN:  I'm guessing he is.  He hates your guts. 

 

KIBBE:  Yeah, I don't think he likes me too much, but I think he really resents the fact that so many citizens in Utah are literally holding him accountable for his record and the old rules of saying one thing back home and doing something else in Washington D.C. just don't apply anymore for Orrin Hatch. 

 

GLENN:  So what happened?  First of all, you know ‑‑ don't ‑‑ don't wound a bear.  You don't want to ever wound a bear because then they come back and eat you. 

 

KIBBE:  Yes. 

 

GLENN:  Are you sure that Dan can win against Orrin Hatch?  Because Orrin already doesn't like the Tea Party movement.  He already has said that ‑‑ what was the phrase last week?  That it is the ‑‑ he despises them? 

 

KIBBE:  We're radical libertarians, he despises us, and you don't come mess with me without getting punched in the mouth. 

 

GLENN:  That's an amazing statement. 

 

KIBBE:  That sounds like a threat. 

 

GLENN:  Yeah, it does.  It does.  I think he's targeting you. 

 

KIBBE:  Yeah. 

 

GLENN:  It's an amazing statement from Orrin Hatch.  But now you've wounded him and he's going to ‑‑ I mean, he's got a ton of money.  He's got the system behind him because he's been in place for 36 years.  He hasn't faced a primary for 36 years and now he has to face Dan who, I mean, really, how much money does Dan have in comparison and what machinery does Dan have? 

 

KIBBE:  Well, what he has is ‑‑ and understand the numbers going into this convention.  Orrin Hatch spent over $6 million trying to solicit the votes of 4,000 convention goers, and he picked on Freedom Works for America a lot because we've spent $670,000.  So he almost outspent the pro reform groups by 10:1 and still failed to come up with the votes.  I think what's changed in America today and certainly changed in Utah is that all this money coming from Washington D.C. to support the reelection of Orrin Hatch will be trumped by those activists on the ground who are willing to do the work, are willing to act on principle, and we have until June 26 to build the name recognition and understanding of what Dan Liljenquist stands for, and I think that's a big opportunity for us.  It's not a long shot.  It's a 50/50 proposition.  If we do our work, we will win. 

 

GLENN:  Okay.  I think we need to decide what his name is because now you just said Liljenquist and I think it's Liljenquist. 

 

STU:  It's not Liljenquist.  There's definitely no J like that's actually pronounced.  It's a silent J. 

 

GLENN:  It is.  I think I heard somebody this weekend call him Lil‑jen‑quist. 

 

STU:  It's not Lil‑jen‑quist, is it, Matt?  No way. 

 

STU:  We had him on the ‑‑

 

GLENN:  That's a stupid name. 

 

STU:  We had him on the air.  He didn't say Lil‑jen‑quist.  Why would you ‑‑

 

KIBBE:  I'm pretty sure it's Lillian‑quist.

 

GLENN:  He didn't say Lillian‑quist, either. 

 

STU:  I don't know what he said.  I'm ‑‑

 

GLENN:  Let's just call him Dan.  Dan for Senate.  Dan for Senate, Dan L. 

 

KIBBE:  Let's call him Dan. 

 

GLENN:  Dan.  Dan's my guy.  How's that? 

 

STU:  The thing I like about this is now, I think, you know, with all the money that's been spent on this race, it all is going to ‑‑ it all comes down now to the actual people making the decision.  They now have the opportunity that it's not going to be done by the Insiders, right? 

 

GLENN:  Well, not necessarily.  This is one of the dirtiest fights.  I mean, tell me if you think I'm wrong here, Matt.  This is a dirty, dirty fight and I mean, I can't believe it, that it's coming from Utah, but it is.  It's nasty. 

 

KIBBE:  It is, this is the nastiest fight I've ever been in.  I've actually never seen a U.S. senator behave the way that Orrin Hatch has behaved.  And to be honest with you, that's not how Utahans prefer their elected officials to behave. 

 

GLENN:  Well, he is saying now ‑‑ let's be fair to Orrin.  What he said when he came out, he said ‑‑ I couldn't believe he said this was, I'm the underdog. 

 

STU:  (Laughing.)

 

KIBBE:  Well, that's great spin, right? 

 

STU:  I don't even think it's a good effort at spin.  The guy's been there in power for a million years.  How can he possibly be the underdog? 

 

GLENN:  Because he's up against people who want change.  I don't know.  Don't ask me to explain it.  I don't know.  But that's what he's ‑‑ that's what he's saying.  He's saying now that, you know, now I'm the underdog.  And, you know, generally people like Orrin Hatch, I mean, I ‑‑ you know, Orrin Hatch, you know, probably now wants to punch ‑‑ what did he say?  Punch you in the face? 

 

KIBBE:  In the mouth. 

 

GLENN:  In the mouth.  So he probably wants to punch me in the mouth now, too, and I don't want to punch him in the mouth, but, you know, people generally like Orrin Hatch because they think he's a nice guy who threatens to punch people in the mouth.  But ‑‑

 

KIBBE:  Well, what's so frustrating is you get these accusations of dirty campaign, campaigning and lying on our part and all we've done is we went through his voting record and published a fairly exhaustive analysis of every time we thought he violated the conservative principles that he claims to espouse, and it's quite a long book and there's quite a number of big issues that matter a lot to limited government free market types starting with the creation of SCHIP when he partnered with Ted Kennedy.  And what was so remarkable about that, that was the year after Republicans defeated Bill Clinton at the polls in 1994, running against government healthcare.  What did Orrin Hatch do?  He decided to partner with Ted Kennedy on Hillary Clinton's Plan B which was children first.  And that's not something that a small government conservative does.  And you can't say that I'm for a balanced budget amendment but never actually take on the programs that you would have to cut to balance the budget.  And not only not do that but then create new programs that grow beyond your wildest imagination. 

 

GLENN:  What do you ‑‑ I don't know if you paid attention at all what happened to Chris Stewart.  Did you see this at all? 

 

KIBBE:  No, I didn't.  I mean, I know ‑‑ I know there was a lot of game‑playing on the convention floor. 

 

GLENN:  Oh, yeah.  I've never heard of anything like this.  Maybe you do.  I mean, you've been around politics more, about you they actually had to cut the mic of somebody.  They actually, the GOP cut the mic of somebody when there were 11 competitors for this one race, Chris Stewart, one ‑‑ probably, I would say one of the five most honorable men I know and he's a straight arrow.  He doesn't really want to serve.  He's doing it because he feels it's time.  You know, he feels like I have to serve and his wife doesn't want him to serve, but she also, you know, they're both, they made that decision on their knees.  And they're like, no, really?  Seriously?  And so they're doing it, they are doing it like Washington did it:  "Okay, well, I'll serve because somebody has got to go do the right thing."  And there's eleven candidates that were running in this district.  They wanted to have a, you know, a primary runoff.  He needed to have 60% to not have the primary.  So he would just be the candidate.  And all of these candidates, the other ten started to collude together and did buttons ABC, anybody but Chris, they made a website that said that he was a liar about his service record that he was discharged on, you know, uncertain circumstances, which is all so easy to verify, said that he lied about his speed.  You know, he set the around the world speed record in the stealth and they ‑‑ he said that they made ‑‑ he made that all up and everything else.  Again, very easy to verify.  All ‑‑ just smeared him over and over and over again.  One guy, all nine of them start to speak and they are all tearing them apart.  He gets up to speak and he says, "I don't know what I've ever done in my life that gives anybody the impression that any of this stuff would be true.  The Republicans are supposed to be about truth; you figure it out."  The next guy gets up, Milt Hanks, and he gets up and he says, "I just want you to know I'm running against Chris, but all the things that are being said here are all lies about Chris," and he starts pointing to the other candidate.  This guy did this, this guy did this, this guy talked to me about this," and he rats them all out. 

 

STU:  Wow. 

 

GLENN:  It's a 20‑point swing and Chris wins.  This guy, Hanks, should be commended for his courage.  They had to escort him.  They tried to cut his mic off, they had to escort him out with armed security to get him out of there.  It was a melee from what I understand.  It's crazy. 

 

KIBBE:  Wow. 

 

STU:  When did Utah turn into Chicago 1934? 

 

GLENN:  I have no idea.  I have no idea.  But it's really, truly amazing, and I'd love to get your opinion, Matt.  I think between "I'm going to punch you in the face," or mouth, and what's happening there.  If this is happening in Utah, I can't imagine what else is happening, and you're going to see decent people who are standing and are not part of the system and don't want to be a part of the system, you're going to see them taken apart by anybody because you play ball or we'll destroy you.  Is that accurate? 

 

KIBBE:  Absolutely.  Well, that's accurate.  And to be honest with you, that's happened to activists on the ground when they tried to participate within the Republican apparatus in state after state I hear this story.  So Utah's not that different.  And what it is, it's the pushback from the establishment that wants to stop the citizen takeover of our government to restore our freedoms, to restore our liberty.  And it's a takeover because the shareholders are demanding accountability for management and it's becoming a hostile takeover because management is circling the wagons and saying we're going to do anything we can to stop you citizens from coming back and taking back your government. 

 

GLENN:  Matt, I appreciate, appreciate you.  We'll talk again soon.  I will tell you that Matt Kibbe at Freedom Works, guy that I totally respect, guy I think totally gets it, and I want to actually ‑‑ can you hang on an sec, Matt?  Do you have time? 

 

KIBBE:  Sure. 

BREAK

GLENN: Matt, are you there?

KIBBE: Yeah, I'm back.

GLENN: Okay. Now we've only got 30 seconds. You blew it, pal. I mean, this was it. This was your chance to be a star.

STU: (Laughing.)

GLENN: That is one sexy tax plan. Let me just say that to you.

KIBBE: You know, I think the whole ethos of what we're trying to do is simple, low, fair and honest, treat everybody the same as everybody else. This so upsets the progressives who want to micromanage everybody's behavior through the tax code. About you that's not what it's for. Why would you ‑‑ why would you try to manipulate everybody's behavior? You should let people be free, fund the necessary functions of government and move on.

GLENN: They know better.

Rage isn’t conservatism — THIS is what true patriots stand for

Gary Hershorn / Contributor | Getty Images

Conservatism is not about rage or nostalgia. It’s about moral clarity, national renewal, and guarding the principles that built America’s freedom.

Our movement is at a crossroads, and the question before us is simple: What does it mean to be a conservative in America today?

For years, we have been told what we are against — against the left, against wokeism, against decline. But opposition alone does not define a movement, and it certainly does not define a moral vision.

We are not here to cling to the past or wallow in grievance. We are not the movement of rage. We are the movement of reason and hope.

The media, as usual, are eager to supply their own answer. The New York Times recently suggested that Nick Fuentes represents the “future” of conservatism. That’s nonsense — a distortion of both truth and tradition. Fuentes and those like him do not represent American conservatism. They represent its counterfeit.

Real conservatism is not rage. It is reverence. It does not treat the past as a museum, but as a teacher. America’s founders asked us to preserve their principles and improve upon their practice. That means understanding what we are conserving — a living covenant, not a relic.

Conservatism as stewardship

In 2025, conservatism means stewardship — of a nation, a culture, and a moral inheritance too precious to abandon. To conserve is not to freeze history. It is to stand guard over what is essential. We are custodians of an experiment in liberty that rests on the belief that rights come not from kings or Congress, but from the Creator.

That belief built this country. It will be what saves it. The Constitution is a covenant between generations. Conservatism is the duty to keep that covenant alive — to preserve what works, correct what fails, and pass on both wisdom and freedom to those who come next.

Economics, culture, and morality are inseparable. Debt is not only fiscal; it is moral. Spending what belongs to the unborn is theft. Dependence is not compassion; it is weakness parading as virtue. A society that trades responsibility for comfort teaches citizens how to live as slaves.

Freedom without virtue is not freedom; it is chaos. A culture that mocks faith cannot defend liberty, and a nation that rejects truth cannot sustain justice. Conservatism must again become the moral compass of a disoriented people, reminding America that liberty survives only when anchored to virtue.

Rebuilding what is broken

We cannot define ourselves by what we oppose. We must build families, communities, and institutions that endure. Government is broken because education is broken, and education is broken because we abandoned the formation of the mind and the soul. The work ahead is competence, not cynicism.

Conservatives should embrace innovation and technology while rejecting the chaos of Silicon Valley. Progress must not come at the expense of principle. Technology must strengthen people, not replace them. Artificial intelligence should remain a servant, never a master. The true strength of a nation is not measured by data or bureaucracy, but by the quiet webs of family, faith, and service that hold communities together. When Washington falters — and it will — those neighborhoods must stand.

Eric Lee / Stringer | Getty Images

This is the real work of conservatism: to conserve what is good and true and to reform what has decayed. It is not about slogans; it is about stewardship — the patient labor of building a civilization that remembers what it stands for.

A creed for the rising generation

We are not here to cling to the past or wallow in grievance. We are not the movement of rage. We are the movement of reason and hope.

For the rising generation, conservatism cannot be nostalgia. It must be more than a memory of 9/11 or admiration for a Reagan era they never lived through. Many young Americans did not experience those moments — and they should not have to in order to grasp the lessons they taught and the truths they embodied. The next chapter is not about preserving relics but renewing purpose. It must speak to conviction, not cynicism; to moral clarity, not despair.

Young people are searching for meaning in a culture that mocks truth and empties life of purpose. Conservatism should be the moral compass that reminds them freedom is responsibility and that faith, family, and moral courage remain the surest rebellions against hopelessness.

To be a conservative in 2025 is to defend the enduring principles of American liberty while stewarding the culture, the economy, and the spirit of a free people. It is to stand for truth when truth is unfashionable and to guard moral order when the world celebrates chaos.

We are not merely holding the torch. We are relighting it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

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?

How America’s elites fell for the same lie that fueled Auschwitz

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.