Michele Bachmann responds to attacks after she calls for investigation into Muslim Brotherhood

Congresswoman Michele Bachmann joined The Glenn Beck Radio Program on GBTV (soon to be known as TheBlaze) this morning to discuss the growing influence of the Muslim Brotherhood in Washington, DC and the attacks on her in the wake of her calls for an investigation. The full interview is available in the clip above.

Transcript of the interview is below:

GLENN:  There are a few people in Washington D.C. that I trust and tell the truth.  There are a few people that call me every time they turn on a water faucet from Washington D.C. and they say, "I just want you to know I'm holding a press conference today because I turned on a water faucet."  You're like, oh.  And after a while, I don't take those people's phone calls and after a while I stop reading their e‑mails.  And there are a few people that are in it for the wrong reasons.  And then there are a few people ‑‑ Jim DeMint is one of them, Michele Bachmann is one of them, Mike Lee is one of them ‑‑ that do it for the right reasons and are clean.  I mean, we were talking about this with Jim DeMint the other day.  Look what Jim DeMint has done.  Jim DeMint just stopped the Law of the Sea Treaty.  I mean, that's ‑‑ that's a pretty amazing thing to do.  You can't take Jim DeMint out because he's clean.  Does he make mistakes from time to time?  Sure.  Everybody does.  But look at what this guy has done.  Michele Bachmann is the same way.  She's a good, decent person.  May not agree with her all the time, but she's a good, decent woman.  And she is standing and she's on the intelligence committee.  Rarely do I get calls from Michele Bachmann.  But when I do, they're always important.  And she has called me a few times and lately it's been about the Muslim Brotherhood because I've been ‑‑ I've been talking to people in Washington D.C. and saying, "Hey, what's the deal with the Muslim Brotherhood thing?  Are we looking into this?"  Michele called me this morning and she said, "Glenn, there are decent people up on the Hill that are trying to expose the Muslim Brotherhood and it is spreading.  This disease is spreading so rapidly, it is breathtaking."  This goes to a documentary that we did about, what, four months ago, three months ago where we exposed what this president is doing with the Muslim Brotherhood and how it is infiltrating all levels.  And we're at a place now that if we don't stop it, we're approaching a point of no return.  And they are purging everything from our military, from our FBI.  So we're not even teaching what the Muslim Brotherhood stands for.  We're not teaching what radical Islam even is.  So how are you ever going to find it?  How are you ever going to recognize it?  It's out of control.

The inspectors general were asked a few questions by a few members of congress.  Michele Bachmann is here to talk about it and this is important.  I beg you to listen because the elephant media and Drudge, Fox, have come out on the wrong side on this issue.  They are following John McCain's lead.  It's the wrong lead.  And if you're not there to back these people up, they're going to be eaten by CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood.

Michele Bachmann, welcome to the program.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  Glenn, thank you so much.  What an important topic, and I have to say that you and the people at The Blaze have been leading the pack on this.  And thank you for the wonderful documentary that you've done because the influence today of the Muslim Brotherhood at the highest levels, from the White House, to the Pentagon, to the FBI, even to our United States military truly is breathless and people have to know about it.

GLENN:  Okay.  So tell me what happened.  You and who else wrote a letter to the inspectors general's office and said, "There are some questions here that need to be addressed."

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  That's right.  It was three members of the intelligence committee:  Myself, Lynn Westmoreland from Georgia, Tom Rooney from Florida and two members of the judiciary committee, Trent Franks of Arizona and Louie Gohmert of Texas all signed onto a letter.  We asked numerous questions of the federal government because a letter was sent ‑‑ well, let me just back up.  After the Fort Hood tragedy, a report was issued that said the real problem in our government is that we are not teaching FBI agents or our military to recognize radical Islam.  So that's what we need to do.  We need to teach about it.

Well, in response to that, 50 ‑‑ over 50 Muslim organizations wrote a letter requesting that the White House start a task force to stop that from happening.  Five days after the White House got this letter, this October 19th letter ‑‑ and people can see it on my website, or maybe you have it on The Blaze ‑‑ five days after the White House got this letter from the 50 Muslim groups, they started the purge of the federal government.  Let me tell you, the federal government doesn't do anything in five days.  But they started the purge of the FBI.  So now the FBI, who are supposed to be trained in radical Islam, elements have been purged off their training materials so they are no longer being taught about what radical Islam is in order to be able to truly identify it ahead of time.  This is serious.  This is also happening throughout our United States military, Department of Justice, and Homeland Security.  And the word "purge" isn't my word.  That's the word used by the 50 Muslim organizations.  They demanded that the president purge the training materials and the trainers.  And so already people have been fired who formerly were teaching what radical Islam is.  They've been fired or they've been reassigned.  And they ask that the library be purged.  Americans don't purge libraries, but they demanded that the FBI's library be purged.  All of this was happening and so we wrote a letter to the inspectors general asking the question:  Don't you think you should look into the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood and what it is they're seeking to do.

GLENN:  Okay.  So you write this, which is your job.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  That's our duty.

GLENN:  Your duty to protect and defend the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  That's right.

GLENN:  There is no question in any sane person's mind that the Muslim Brotherhood ‑‑ I mean, look at this ‑‑ look at this guy who ran and won the presidency in Egypt.  He says, "Oh, I'm a moderate.  I'm a moderate."  As soon as he wins, it's Sharia law, we're going down, you know, death for Allah is our highest goal.  It's the all the same crap.  So ‑‑

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  And they call for Jerusalem to become Egypt's capital, not Israel's capital.  They call for the demise of Israel and the demise of the United States.  They believe in civilization, jihad, which is to come into the United States and subvert the United States from within.  I know it sounds like radical stuff, but all you have to do is look ‑‑ right, just look at the Muslim Brotherhood and who they say they are.

GLENN:  Okay.  So when you wrote this letter, then Keith Ellison comes out.  And Keith Ellison is ‑‑ he has a record of being the Mafia hitman.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  Well, he has a long record of being associated with CAIR and with the Muslim Brotherhood.  CAIR is an unindicted co‑conspirator, as stated in the large terrorist financing case that we've had in the United States of America and so he came out and essentially wanted to shut down the inspectors general from even looking into any of the questions that we were asking.  So he wanted to shut it down.  In response I wrote another letter back to Keith Ellison, a 16‑page letter which I would encourage all of your listeners to go and read this letter.  It's what I call a bulletproof letter.  I have 59 footnotes with one example after another of the penetration of the Muslim Brotherhood into the federal government.  One of the most recent is so outrageous, it's hard to believe.  Two weeks ago the State Department broke its own law, like I said, and let a foreign terrorist come into the United States, into the White House, meet with the National Security Council ‑‑

GLENN:  Listen to this.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: ‑‑ and demand the release of the blind Sheik.  This is absolutely outrageous.

GLENN:  There's more to this story that I think is even more outrageous.  Not only did they break their own laws, give this guy a special waiver, bring him into the White House.  This is a guy who is a known ‑‑ part of a known terrorist organization.  He then campaigns to have the blind sheikh released, but who pays for his airline ticket?

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  We do.  The taxpayers.  What I want to know is did we upgrade him to first class.  I mean, this is ‑‑ this is outrageous what has happened.  And so then now what's happened is the attack machine has been turned on myself and the other members of congress who have been asking the questions, that somehow we're the Muslim haters, we're the witch‑hunters, we're the new Joe McCarthyites because we're asking these questions.  All the while two weeks ago the Obama administration breaks federal law to bring someone that we list on the State Department as a terrorist organization, a member of that terrorist organization, we bring him into the White House?  You don't get any higher when it comes to intelligence secrets, you don't get any higher than the National Security Council.  He sits down with the National Security Council in our White House and has the guts to demand that we release one of the worst, most violent terrorists that we have behind bars.  He wants us to let him out of prison, to let him go free, the guy who was the mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the blind sheikh.

GLENN:  So let's ‑‑

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  And you don't hear a peep about this.

GLENN:  No, of course not.  Let me ‑‑ let me take you here because one of the more controversial things is you say Anthony Weiner's wife will is ‑‑ has connections to the Muslim Brotherhood.  Now, this is important because she works for Hillary Clinton.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  She is the chief aid for the ‑‑ to the Secretary of State, and we quoted from a document, and this has been well reported all across Arab media, that her father ‑‑ her late father who's now deceased was a part of the Muslim Brotherhood.  Her brother was a part of the Muslim Brotherhood, and her mother was a part of what's called the Muslim Sisterhood.  It would be, we have requirements to get a high level security clearance.  One thing that the government looks at are your associations, and in particular your family associations.  And this applies to everyone.  It would be the same that is true with me.  If my family members were associated with Hamas, a terrorist organization, that alone could be sufficient to disqualify me from getting a security clearance.  So all we did is ask, did the federal government look into her family associations before she got a high level security clearance.

GLENN:  And it's not an unreasonable thing to ask seeing that this president and this administration has ‑‑ didn't know ‑‑ apparently didn't know that Van Jones was the founding ‑‑ one of the founding members of a radical revolutionary, anti‑American, Communist organization, and he's in the White House.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  That's right.  That's right, and it's not ‑‑

GLENN:  So something is ‑‑ somebody's dropping the ball some place, or somebody knows.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  That's right.  And somebody has been dropping the ball since the beginning of the Obama administration.  And this isn't intent to be partisan or out to get the president.  I mean, quite honestly on the intelligence committee I'm happy to report we are the most bipartisan committee I've ever been a part of, and with all of these unprecedented leaks that have been coming out from our federal government, all of which, by the way, undermine Israel, and Israel's ability to defend herself against a nuclear Iran, we are with one voice, Democrat and Republican, outraged by these leaks that are coming out of the administration.  Never before in the history of the country have we seen this level of leaks coming out, but at the same time there's also a parallel track of influence from the Muslim Brotherhood in the highest levels of the federal government, and we think that we need to get answers to these questions.  And that's the purpose of our letters.  We're asking that the inspectors general answer these questions, and Keith Ellison is trying to shut this, these questions down from getting addressed.

GLENN:  I'm really tight on time and I want to hit a couple of other things.  Stu's got ‑‑ Stu's been going over all of this information, and he's got one question for you.

STU:  Well, I see here that you did like, too, the actual military document that talks about what is a potentially disqualifying condition for security clearance.  It says, quote:  Contact with a foreign family member, if that contact creates a heightened risk of foreign exploitation, inducement, manipulation, pressure or coercion.  Then goes on to say the subject's closest and most frequent contacts are the ones most likely to present a security risk.  And you're talking about both her father, who's now deceased, her mother and her brother.  So I think the media seems to be holding you to this standard that you have to have this case completely proven when it seems like what you're saying is, is there a legitimate process question:  Are they actually asking these questions before handing out these clearances.

GLENN:  Right.  This has been ‑‑ I mean, your links and your footnotes ‑‑ and they're down, by the way.  I don't know if you know that, Michele.  But the Al‑Jazeera links that you put in and you said, here, go link ‑‑ go find the story on Al‑Jazeera.  We can't get to them this morning.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  Oh, really?

GLENN:  Oh, yeah.  We're going to need ‑‑

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  Gosh.  Maybe we can go ‑‑ maybe we can go in the past and dig them up so that we can resurrect them.

GLENN:  Yeah, we're going to have to get them because they've either been scrubbed or they're being hammered, you know, by so much traffic which I highly doubt.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  Heavens.

GLENN:  So that's ‑‑ I mean, you have links showing that in Al‑Jazeera's own coverage.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  Well, these links were up as of last Friday.

GLENN:  Yeah, well, they're not ‑‑

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  I wrote the letter and we got it out by midnight last Friday night and the links were up last Friday.  So they've taken them down.  Gee.

GLENN:  I will tell you that that's not unusual.  As we've followed these stories like this, that's really not unusual anymore.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  That's even more reason why we should be looking into this.

GLENN:  Yeah.  Let me just say this to you and then one more quick question.  I just wrote a letter to the president of my company for The Blaze and he's in charge of all content.  He's kind of our news, you know, our uber news director, if you will, he's the president of content.  And I just said we know the truth on this story.  We've had this for a while.  I do not want this company to sit down on this.  So we are going to cover this and continue to cover this to make sure that people hear this story because, Michele, you guys are absolutely right and it is a matter of national survival.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  That's right.

GLENN:  Let me ask you ‑‑

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  National security.

GLENN:  Let me ask you one quick question.  John McCain and all of the elephant media are falling right in line with the Muslim Brotherhood.  Bullcrap.  What did John McCain do yesterday?

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  He went on the Senate floor and he gave a spirited defense of Huma Abedin, who is a friend of his.  And so that's what he did and I think ‑‑

GLENN:  But you're not saying that she is compromised?  You're saying have we looked into this, right?

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  That's right.  That's all we're saying because we did not infer that she is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood or that she's working on behalf of the Muslim Brotherhood.

GLENN:  Right.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  Our point was regarding the security clearance.

GLENN:  Right.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  And did she have to go through the same sort of process that anyone else has to go to.  Did they check the boxes.  Because if the State Department breaks American law to bring a terrorist into the White House, a member of a terrorist organization, it certainly is conceivable that maybe they looked the other way on issuing the security clearance.  That's all we're doing is asking a question.

GLENN:  I have to tell you, we're at war.  We're at war with people in the Middle East, and her ‑‑ she's compromised ‑‑ forget about the Muslim thing.  She's compromised or could have been compromised.  Her husband was sending dirty photos of himself.  I mean, you know, in a wartime, you would never put that person in a delicate situation because the family has already been compromised.  But I digress.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  Well, and ‑‑

GLENN:  Thank you very much.  Go ahead.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  I was just going to say the Muslim Brotherhood elements have declared war against the United States.

GLENN:  All right.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: ‑‑ and Israel.  And we need to recognize that they are at war, even if we don't fully, are onto this.  And we've got to, but I thank you and everyone at The Blaze for taking this on because the media has a completely different view of it.  So thank you.

GLENN:  Well, they're always ‑‑ they're almost always wrong, especially when it comes to these things.  Michele, thank you very much and keep up the fight.  Never sit down.  We've got your back.

Has anybody else noticed how politicized sports have gotten? The NFL is practically three berets away from a socialist revolution. They seem more concerned with dismantling social norms and protesting than with playing football. The Minnesota Vikings announced yesterday they will host a summit and fundraiser for LGBTQ inclusion in sports.

According to LifeSiteNews, the LGBTQ inclusion summit will "include speeches, interviews, and panel discussions with a variety of athletes, coaches, and activists who are homosexual or transgender" and "will be hosted at the team's recently-completed TCO Performance Center."

The summit marks the latest in the NFL's continued advocacy for LGBTQ rights and initiatives. Last year, the league launched NFL Pride, in a bid to "heighten sensitivity to the LGBTQ community" and reinforce "commitment to an inclusive environment in which all employees are welcome."

RELATED: New NFL policy will punish players who protest the national anthem

Fair enough. No one should be harassed or discriminated against in the workplace, but is that really what this is about? Because it kind of seems like there's more going on here. Kind of seems like there's a political, ideological slant to it. At the very least, it's virtue signaling.

The summit is "part of a settlement agreement the Vikings made after [former Vikings punter Chris Kluwe], who is straight, filed a lawsuit against the team in 2014 for allegedly creating a hostile work environment for homosexual and transgender people."

So, yeah, virtue signaling.

Ultimately, the NFL is a private business and, as we saw with the National Anthem kneelers, they can conduct their business however they like, and in turn the consumers can decide whether or not to keep giving them their money.

Mostly, the situation is just strange. Can you imagine how well this partnership would have gone over in the 1970s? Moreover, at what point does being LGBTQ come up during sports? How have we landed in this strange place, where politics and gender and race must be represented within every single interaction?

It's also worth mentioning that most people don't care if an athlete is gay — with the possible exception of transgender athletes, but that's another topic entirely. This tolerance has actually been confirmed by studies and surveys throughout all kinds of sports, in various countries throughout the world. Even countries with, shall we say, a far less tolerant view of the LGBTQ community than we have here in the USA — even people in those countries believe that it doesn't matter. People watch sports to see athleticism, to enjoy the unpredictable fury of sports at its finest.

People watch sports to see athleticism, to enjoy the unpredictable fury of sports at its finest.

Overwhelmingly, regardless of the sport, people do not care about the athletes' sexuality — in fact, most of us would rather not know. We don't watch golf to muse the social significance of gender norms and sexuality. We don't go to a baseball game to meditate on the evils of the patriarchy and the terrors of cultural appropriation. If an athlete is good, who cares what their orientation is? It's certainly not a new idea that LGBTQ can perform in sports. Typically, what sports fans care about is talent. Is the athlete good?

I guarantee that if Liberace rose from the dead tomorrow morning and was suddenly able to play basketball as well as 90s-era Michael Jordan, Chicago Bulls fans would not complain if he joined the team. I think it's fair to say that most people like sports better when they aren't swamped with politics. Keep the politics elsewhere, especially these days, when it's nearly impossible to escape the increasingly intolerant politics of the Left.

Perhaps they could learn a lesson from our friends, the Ancient Greeks. It's no secret that the Ancient Greeks indulged in, well, LGBTQ activities. They were quite fond of the various activities. But they also built a civilization of tremendous importance to humanity as a whole. Philosophy, art and, yes, sports. When they were charged off to war, they didn't slap a Rainbow flag bumper sticker on the back of their chariot. Their sexuality did not define their identity. They were multifaceted human beings, able to go to war or to the theater or to the town hall as a citizen, because citizenry was what mattered, personhood and selfhood. More importantly, they lived in a time when people cared about self and tribe over sexuality and gender. Identity was selfhood, not sexuality.

At the end of the day, who cares if the Minnesota Vikings want to host an LGBTQ event? But they should expect to see an increase in shoulder-padded men traipsing across the stage on Broadway.

UPDATE: Here's how the discussion went on radio. Watch the video below.

Most people like sports better when politics aren't involved

Breaking down the announcement that the Minnesota Vikings will be hosting a summit and fundraiser for LGBTQ inclusion in sports.


Stop trying to be right and think of the children

Mario Tama/Getty Images

All the outrage this week has mainly focused on one thing: the evil Trump administration and its minions who delight in taking children from their illegal immigrant parents and throwing them all in dungeons. Separate dungeons, mind you.

That makes for a nice, easy storyline, but the reality is less convenient. Most Americans seem to agree that separating children from their parents — even if their parents entered the US illegally — is a bad thing. But what if that mom and dad you're trying to keep the kids with aren't really the kids' parents? Believe it or not, fraud happens.

RELATED: Where were Rachel Maddow's tears for immigrant children in 2014?

While there are plenty of heartbreaking stories of parents simply seeking a chance for a better life for their children in the US, there are also corrupt, abusive human traffickers who profit from the illegal immigration trade. And sorting all of this out is no easy task.

This week, the Department of Homeland Security said that since October 2017, more than 300 children have arrived at the border with adults claiming to be their parents who turned out not to be relatives. 90 of these fraud cases came from the Rio Grande Valley sector alone.

In 2017, DHS reported 46 causes of fraudulent family claims. But there have already been 191 fraud cases in 2018.

Shouldn't we be concerned about any child that is smuggled by a human trafficker?

When Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen pointed out this 315 percent increase, the New York Times was quick to give these family fraud cases "context" by noting they make up less than one percent of the total number of illegal immigrant families apprehended at the southern border. Their implication was that Nielsen was exaggerating the numbers. Even if the number of fraud cases at the border was only 0.001 percent, shouldn't we be concerned about any child that is smuggled by a human trafficker?

This is the most infuriating part of this whole conversation this week (if you can call it a "conversation") — that both sides have an angle to defend. And while everyone's busy yelling and making their case, children are being abused.

What if we just tried, for two seconds, to love having mercy more than we love having to be right all the time?

Remember when cartoons were happy things? Each panel took you on a tiny journey, carrying you to an unexplored place. In Understanding Comics, Scott McCloud writes:

The comics creator asks us to join in a silent dance of the seen and the unseen. The visible and the invisible. This dance is unique to comics. No other artform gives so much to its audience while asking so much from them as well. This is why I think it's a mistake to see comics as a mere hybrid of the graphic arts and prose fiction. What happens between . . . panels is a kind of magic only comics can create.

When that magic is manipulated or politicized, it often devolves the artform into a baseless thing. Yesterday, Occupy Wall Street published the perfect example of low-brow deviation of the artform: A six-panel approach at satire, which imitates the instructions-panel found in the netted cubbyhole behind seats on airplanes. The cartoon is a critique of the recent news about immigrant children being separated from their parents after crossing the border. It is a step-by-step guide to murdering US Immigrations and Customs Enforcement agents.

RELATED: Cultural appropriation has jumped the shark, and everyone is noticing

The first panel shows a man shoving an infant into a cage meant for Pomeranians. The following five panels feature instructions, and include pictures of a cartoonish murder.

The panels read as follows:

  1. If an ICE agent tries to take your child at the border, don't panic.
  2. Pull your child away as quickly as possibly by force.
  3. Gently tell your child to close his/her eyes and ears so they won't witness what you are about to do.
  4. Grab the ICE agent from behind and push your knife into his chest with an upward thrust, causing the agent's sternum to break.
  5. Reach into his chest and pull out his still beating heart.
  6. Hold his bloody heart out for all other agents to see, and tell them that the same fate awaits them if they f--- with your child again.

Violent comics are nothing new. But most of the time, they remain in the realms of invented worlds — in other words, not in our own, with reference to actual people, let alone federal agents.

The mainstream media made a game of crying racism with every cartoon depiction of Obama during his presidency, as well as during his tenure as Senator, when the New Yorker, of all things, faced scrutiny for depicting him in "Muslim clothing." Life was a minefield for political cartoonists during the Obama era.

Chris Hondros/Getty Images

This year, we saw the leftist outrage regarding The Simpsons character Apu — a cartoon representation of a highly-respected, though cartoonishly-depicted, character on a cartoon show composed of cartoonishly-depicted characters.

We all remember Charlie Hebdo, which, like many outlets that have used cartoon satire to criticize Islam, faced the wrath and ire of people unable to see even the tamest representation of the prophet, Muhammad.

Interesting, isn't it? Occupy Wall Street publishes a cartoon that advocates murdering federal agents, and critics are told to lighten up. Meanwhile, the merest depiction of Muhammad has resulted in riots throughout the world, murder and terror on an unprecedented scale.

The intersection of Islam and comics is complex enough to have its own three-hour show, so we'll leave it at that, for now. Although, it is worth mentioning the commentary by satirical website The Onion, which featured a highly offensive cartoon of all the major religious figures except Muhammad. It noted:

Following the publication of the image above, in which the most cherished figures from multiple religious faiths were depicted engaging in a lascivious sex act of considerable depravity, no one was murdered, beaten, or had their lives threatened.

Of course, Occupy Wall Street is free to publish any cartoon they like. Freedom of speech, and so on—although there have been several instances in which violent cartoons were ruled to have violated the "yelling fire in a crowded theater" limitation of the First Amendment.

Posting it to Twitter is another issue — this is surely in violation of Twitter's violent content policy, but something tells me nothing will come of it. It's a funny world, isn't it? A screenshot of a receipt from Chick-fil-A causes outrage but a cartoon advocating murder gets crickets.

RELATED: Twitter mob goes ballistic over Father's Day photo of Caitlyn Jenner. Who cares?

In Understanding Comics, Scott McCloud concludes that, "Today the possibilities for comics are — as they've always been — endless. Comics offers . . . range and versatility, with all the potential imagery of film and painting plus the intimacy of the written word. And all that's needed is the desire to be heard, the will to learn, and the ability to see."

Smile, and keep moving forward.

Crude and awful as the Occupy Wall Street comic is, the best thing we can do is nod and look elsewhere for the art that will open our eyes. Let the lunatics draw what they want, let them stew in their own flawed double standards. Otherwise, we're as shallow and empty as they are, and nothing good comes of that. Smile, and keep moving forward.

Things are getting better. Show the world how to hear, how to learn, how to see.

People should start listening to Nikki Haley

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP/Getty Images

Okay. Let's take a vote. You know, an objective, quantifiable count. How many resolutions has the UN Human Rights Council adopted condemning dictatorships? Easy. Well. How do you define "dictatorship"?

Well, one metric is the UN Human Rights Council Condemnation. How many have the United Nations issued to China, with a body count higher than a professional Call of Duty player?

Zero.

How about Venezuela, where socialism is devouring its own in the cruelest, most unsettling ways imaginable?

Zero.

And Russia, home of unsettling cruelty and rampant censorship, murder and (actual) homophobia?

Zero.

Iraq? Zero. Turkey? Iraq? Zero. Cuba? Zero. Pakistan? Zero.

RELATED: Nikki Haley just dropped some serious verbal bombs on Russia at the UN

According to UN Human Rights Council Condemnations, 2006-2016, none of these nations is as dangerous as we'd imagined. Or, rather, none of them faced a single condemnation. Meanwhile, one country in particular has faced unbelievable scrutiny and fury — you'll never guess which country.

No, it's not Somalia. It's Israel. With 68 UN Human Rights Council Condemnations! In fact, the number of total United Nations condemnations against Israel outnumbers the total of condemnations against all other countries combined. The only country that comes close is Syria, with 15.

The Trump administration withdrew from the United Nations Human Rights Council on Tuesday in protest of what it perceives as an entrenched bias against Israel and a willingness to allow notorious human rights abusers as members.

In an address to the UN Security Council on Tuesday, Nikki Haley said:

Let's remember that the Hamas terrorist organization has been inciting violence for years, long before the United States decided to move our embassy. This is what is endangering the people of Gaza. Make no mistake, Hamas is pleased with the results from yesterday... No country in this chamber would act with more restraint than Israel has.

Maybe people should start listening to Haley. Hopefully, they will. Not likely, but there's no crime in remaining hopeful.