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

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.

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.