Ann Coulter on last night's debate: "You want this man in the White House"

Ann Coulter was one of the first conservatives in the media to say that Mitt Romney was going to be "the guy" for the GOP. She got a lot of heat for saying he was the best choice and Republicans best chance to win.

It looks like Ann was right.

"It was a bloodbath last night," Glenn said to Ann when she joined them on radio this morning.

"Yes, it was," she responded. "And as I said earlier this week to you, I thought just letting people get a look at him, what you and I have seen in him: he's smart, he's prepared, he's poised."

Not only did Mitt Romney win the debate hands down, he was able to present himself to the American people. So many Americans that aren't tuned into to politics only know what the mainstream media is saying about Mitt Romney. Last night he was able to present himself to the average American.

"People are just shocked to actually see Mitt Romney utterly in control of the facts and competent, and you so want that man in the White House.  The way he explains things with facts and figures, but not in a confusing way," Ann said. "And he just comes across as an incredibly decent man.  There's no elitism.  There's no, "Oh, he reminds me of my first husband" business.  He was charming, he was friendly.  Even when he was criticizing Obama policies, he always did it with a smile on his face, and it reminds me of during the primaries when I was a big Romney supporter and many of my friends and colleagues were not, and every time they would see Romney give a full speech such as after he won the Iowa caucus and then after he won New Hampshire, different people would say to me at different times, "Wow, that was the best speech he's ever given.  If he would only give them like that all the time." He does!  Watch him."

No one was really sure what Mitt Romney was going to do in this debate. The media, by underestimating him, actually raised the bar for what President Obama had to do as a result. But, no on expected the poor performance that Barack Obama gave last night. Glenn compared it to Al Gore's former presidential debate performances - the heavy sighs.

"He kept looking down and frowning," Glenn said. "Where Romney would look at the president, he addressed him in the eye, looked him in the eye the whole time.  It's one thing to say something about somebody behind their back.  It's another to look them in the eye and kindly say, "Mr. President, you're wrong." And he did. When Obama was trying to dish it, which was about four-seconds, when he was trying to dish it, he wouldn't look Romney in the eye.  He really wouldn't go after him and look him in the eye like a man."

Not only was Mitt Romney's demeanor stronger and more presidential, but his appearance was much stronger.

"I mean, Obama looks like a guy who has grown ‑‑ who's lost so much weight, he's wearing a suit that's too big for him.  He looks anemic," Ann added. "I seriously am wondering whether he's trying to communicate to us that he doesn't want this job anymore."

One of the most telling parts of the debate for the president was the closing.

"Thank you. And I want to thank Governor Romney because I think this was a terrific debate and I very much appreciate it. All those things are designed to make sure that the American people, their genius ‑‑ their grip, their determination is channeled. And they have an opportunity to succeed.  And everybody's getting a fair shot and everybody's getting a fair share.  Everybody's doing a fair share and everybody's playing by the same rules."

After hearing the audio clip, this is what Ann had to say: "As I think Romney pointed out to him that it was relatives and friends and donors to the Obama campaign that were getting all these massive grants for green companies that then went under, another fantastic line ‑‑ sorry, we'll get back to what you think the point was.  Another fantastic line was when Romney said about Solyndra and all these green companies that have lost, he said, you know, one of my friends said, "You don't just pick winners and losers.  You pick all losers"."

Glenn believes that after the president's performance last night, we're about to see a full assault on the senses of the American people. The media and the administration's candidate is in trouble, and they're going to have to unleash.

"What do you think is coming?" he asked Ann.

"I have been anticipating, and the reason I wrote the book [Mugged], that there would be a lot of racial Mao Maoing again trying to guilt Americans into reelecting the first half‑black president and I don't know, maybe they'll give up on that now," she responded. "I must say, and I hate to even mention it because it sounds like, you know, conservative paranoia, but it is simply a fact that no book of mine has been so ignored, completely ignored.  I mean not even attacking me when I'm not there, as this book."

"The mainstream media does not want anyone to know this book exists."

COVID is back! Or that is what we’re being told anyway...

A recent spike in COVID cases has triggered the left's alarm bells, and the following institutions have begun to reinstate COVID-era mandates. You might want to avoid them if you enjoy breathing freely...

Do YOU think institutions should bring back COVID-era mandates if cases increase? Let us know your thoughts HERE.

Morris Brown College

Both of Upstate Medical's hospitals in Syracuse, New York

Corey Henry / Senior Staff Photographer | The Daily Orange

Auburn Community Hospital, New York

Kevin Rivoli / The Citizen | Auburn Pub

Lionsgate Studio

AaronP/Bauer-Griffin / Contributor | GETTY IMAGES

United Health Services in New York

Kaiser Permanente in California

Justin Sullivan / Staff | GETTY IMAGES

There was a time when both the Left and the Right agreed that parents have the final say in raising their children... Not anymore.

In the People's Republic of California, the STATE, not parents, will determine whether children should undergo transgender treatments. The California state legislature just passed a law that will require judges in child custody cases to consider whether parents support a child’s gender transition. According to the law, the state now thinks total affirmation is an integral part of a child’s “health, safety, and welfare.”

We are inching closer to a dystopia where the state, not the parents, have ultimate rights over their children, a history that people from former Soviet nations would feign repeating.

Glenn dove into the law AND MORE in this episode titled, "Parental Advisory: The EXPLICIT plot to control YOUR kids." To get all the research that went into this episode AND information on how YOU can fight back, enter your email address below:

If you didn't catch Wednesday night's Glenn TV special, be sure to check it out HERE!

The Biden admin has let in MORE illegal aliens than the populations of THESE 15 states

GUILLERMO ARIAS / Contributor | Getty Images

There are currently an estimated 16.8 MILLION illegal aliens residing in the United States as of June 2023, according to the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). This number is already 1.3 million higher than FAIR's January 2022 estimate of 15.5 million and a 2.3 million increase from its end-of-2020 estimate. Even Democrats like New York City's Mayor Adams Mayor Adams are waking up to what Conservatives have been warning for years: we are in a border CRISIS.

However, this isn't the same border crisis that Republicans were warning about back in 2010. In the first two years of the Biden administration alone, the illegal alien population increased by 16 PERCENT nationwide, imposing a whopping net cost of $150.6 BILLION PER YEAR on American taxpayers. That is nearly DOUBLE the total amount that the Biden administration has sent to Ukraine.

This isn't the same border crisis that Republicans were warning about back in 2010.

These large numbers often make it difficult to conceptualize the sheer impact of illegal immigration on the United States. To put it in perspective, we have listed ALL 15 states and the District of Colombia that have smaller populations than the 2.3 MILLION illegal immigrants, who have entered the U.S. under the Biden administration. That is more than the entire populations of Wyoming, Vermont, and South Dakota COMBINED—and the American taxpayers have to pay the price.

Here are all 16 states/districts that have FEWER people than the illegal immigrants who have entered the U.S. under the Biden administration.

1. New Mexico

Population: 2,110,011

2. Idaho

Population: 1,973,752

3. Nebraska

Population: 1,972,292

4. West Virginia

Population: 1,764,786

5. Hawaii

Population: 1,433,238

6. New Hampshire

Population: 1,402,957

7. Maine

Population: 1,393,442

8. Montana

Population: 1,139,507

9. Rhode Island

Population: 1,090,483

10. Delaware

Population: 1,031,985

11. South Dakota

Population: 923,484

12. North Dakota

Population: 780,588

13. Alaska

Population: 732,984

14. Washington DC

Population: 674,815

15. Vermont

Population: 647,156

16. Wyoming

Population: 583,279

POLL: Should the Government control the future of AI?

The Washington Post / Contributor | Getty Images

Earlier this week, tech titans, lawmakers, and union leaders met on Capitol Hill to discuss the future of AI regulation. The three-hour meeting boasted an impressive roster of tech leaders including, Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, Google CEO Sundar Pichai, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, and others, along with more than 60 US Senators.

Tech Titans and Senators gathered in the Kennedy Caucus Room.The Washington Post / Contributor | Getty Images

The meeting was closed to the public, so what was exactly discussed is unknown. However, what we do know is that a majority of the CEOs support AI regulation, the most vocal of which is Elon Musk. During the meeting, Musk called AI "a double-edged sword" and strongly pushed for regulation in the interest of public safety.

A majority of the CEOs support AI regulation.

Many other related issues were discussed, including the disruption AI has caused to the job market. As Glenn has discussed on his program, the potential for AI to alter or destroy jobs is very real, and many have already felt the effects. From taxi drivers to Hollywood actors and writers, AI's presence can be felt everywhere and lawmakers are unsure how to respond.

The potential for AI to alter or destroy jobs is very real.

Ultimately, the meeting's conclusion was less than decisive, with several Senators making comments to the tune of "we need more time before we act." The White House is expected to release an executive order regarding AI regulation by the end of the year. But now it's YOUR turn to tell us what YOU think needs to be done!

Should A.I. be regulated?

Can the government be trusted with the power to regulate A.I.? 

Can Silicon Valley be trusted to regulate AI? 

Should AI development be slowed for safety, despite its potential advantages?

If a job can be done cheaper and better by AI, should it be taken away from a human?

Do you feel that your job is threatened by AI?