Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi are idiots

This is merely further confirmation of an already well known fact, but we here at the Glenn Beck Program feel it’s important to immortalize the unending insanity and stupidity of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. Check out the latest evidence which strongly suggests Reid and Pelosi are very, very dumb human beings. Find out what they did in the clip above from radio.

Transcript of segment is below:

GLENN: Harry Reid has lied now about cutting $2.6 trillion from the budget. Here he is.

REID: The American people need to understand that it's not as if we've done nothing for the debt. $2.6 trillion, $2.6 trillion already we've made in cuts.

PAT: No.

GLENN: No.

PAT: Unfortunately that's so far from being true. It's ‑‑

GLENN: Well, let's go to ‑‑ let's go to the really conservative, I think it's really conservative factcheck.org, really conservative.

PAT: Oh, ultra, ultra rightwing conservative.

GLENN: Right. Right.

PAT: Who calls it a lie.

GLENN: Yeah.

PAT: It almost ‑‑ they say it almost all came from tax increases.

GLENN: By the way ‑‑

PAT: Not spending cuts.

GLENN: ‑‑ factcheck.org is not a conservative organization.

PAT: No. We're being just a tad facetious on that.

GLENN: Really?

PAT: Just a tad.

GLENN: When I say I think it's perfectly rational and right that Stu, who has a baby on Saturday, his wife has a baby on Saturday is not only off today but has taken the entire week off to recover.

PAT: That's facetious?

JEFFY: Yes.

PAT: Really? I wasn't catching any of that earlier today.

GLENN: Really? Okay.

PAT: Huh. That's really weird.

GLENN: So anyway, most of these things that he's talking about, 2.6 trillion comes from tax increases.

PAT: Increases and nothing to do with spending cuts.

GLENN: Because remember they said they are not even going to deal with spending cuts?

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: Not going to deal with it.

PAT: And Nancy Pelosi just said again, and we played this I think last hour, "We don't have a spending problem."

GLENN: Play that again because that's just so ‑‑

PAT: Crazy.

GLENN: That's just so ‑‑ say it again.

PAT: That's crazy.

GLENN: Say it like Michael Jackson.

PAT: That's crazy.

GLENN: Now say it like Al Gore.

PAT: That's crazy. That's crazy.

GLENN: You've got to say it ‑‑ but you have to say it with that chuckle in the voice where he's like ‑‑

PAT: That's crazy. Just below the surface of the Earth, it's crazy hot. All right. Here's Nancy Pelosi.

PELOSI: Though it isn't as much a spending problem as it is a priorities and that's what a budget is setting, priorities.

GLENN: Yeah.

WALLACE: But you talk about growth, even Christina Romer, the form head of the council of economic advisors for the president says you increase taxes, that also hurts growth.

PELOSI: Well, it's about timing. It's about timing.

PAT: Timing.

PELOSI: And it's about timing as to when you make cuts as well. We ‑‑

WALLACE: But you ‑‑ the fiscal cliff you raised taxes $650 billion right away.

PAT: Listen to this.

PELOSI: Yeah. And that was a very good thing to do on people making over the high end in our population.

PAT: She doesn't have any idea on what ‑‑

GLENN: None of them do. None of them do.

PAT: On who they put those ‑‑ that tax burden to.

GLENN: None of them do.

PAT: She was going to say on people over a million or whatever. She didn't know.

GLENN: Yeah.

PAT: So she had to go on people who are at the high end of our...

GLENN: Do you remember ‑‑

PAT: Unbelievable.

GLENN: I don't remember what the topic was and I think I'd like to stay away from the topic because it might reveal who shared this with us because they have never shared it on the air. But do you remember we talked about ‑‑ yeah, I think I can say it. Harry Reid. And let's just say it was on tax increases. And he was talking to a member and he said, "Harry, we can come together on this because you are ‑‑ you've been the champion of this for ten years." And it wasn't on tax increases. It was something else. But you've been a champion on this. And he actually said, well ‑‑

PAT: Oh, yeah. I have to ask?

GLENN: I have to ask and see if I'm still for that." You have to ask if you're still for that?

PAT: Uh‑huh.

GLENN: I mean, that's the kind of stuff, these guys are so out of touch. They are not ‑‑ they are really not ‑‑ they are just a face. They are puppets. They are really puppets. They are moving in one direction and it's a big, very big, you know, well thought‑out plan and they are just going for it. They are just sticking together. Nobody's actually engaging their own individual brain. They are acting as a collective. And the Center For American Progress is doing all the planning. I mean, we already know that they did all the stimulus bill. We know between them and the unions that they wrote ObamaCare.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: So ‑‑

PAT: And they themselves don't know anything.

GLENN: They don't.

PAT: And Nancy Pelosi proved that a couple of times during this same interview. Listen to see if you can find the one little hair in the ointment.

PELOSI: We avow the First Amendment. We stand with that and say that people have a right to have a gun to protect themselves.

PAT: Anybody see the problem there? We avow the First Amendment there and say that people have a right to own their guns.

GLENN: First Amendment? It's the Second Amendment.

PAT: She doesn't even know what amendment is the gun amendment.

GLENN: Play it again.

PELOSI: We avow the First Amendment.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

PELOSI: We stand with that and say that people have a right to have a gun to protect themselves.

PAT: Okay.

GLENN: She just such a ‑‑

PAT: Oh, my gosh. I mean, this was the speaker of the House and she's still one of the most powerful people in America. It's mind‑numbing that she's in that position because she's an idiot. She's an idiot and so is Harry Reid.

GLENN: Harry Reid, I think there might be something wrong with Harry Reid, seriously. There might be, you know ‑‑

PAT: No, I think you're right.

GLENN: I think there's something wrong with him. I think he's ‑‑ maybe he's senile or what. I don't know what's wrong with him but I think there's something wrong with him. And I say that, you know, I don't mean to be rude. And I don't want to be ‑‑ but I think there's something wrong.

PAT: Yeah, you're not being flippant.

GLENN: No, no.

PAT: It does seem like there's something wrong with him.

GLENN: Yeah, we've had conversations with people who have been around him in the last year or so and they all say the same thing.

PAT: Well, and his positions have shifted from 20 years ago.

GLENN: Well, you're ‑‑

PAT: Almost a 180 in some cases.

GLENN: Your positions probably ‑‑

PAT: Which they can change, they can evolve but I mean, he's done a 180.

GLENN: But you know what? Pat, have I done 180 some?

PAT: Well, yeah, but there was reasons for that.

GLENN: Exactly right. So there's nothing wrong with your positions changing over a 20‑year period.

PAT: No, but what was his pivot point that they all ‑‑

GLENN: Exactly right.

PAT: Yes.

GLENN: What changed him.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: What changed him. Because they've just, they changed and they flipped.

PAT: Radicalized.

GLENN: And they really haven't been ‑‑ it hasn't been 20 years.

PAT: No, it hasn't.

GLENN: It's been within the last decade where it's just been, "What is this?" From, you look at his positions 2004 and his positions today; they are not the same by any stretch of the imagination. He's a radical. And I don't believe he is a radical; he's just taking positions and protecting the radical positions and I don't think he even understands. I don't even know ‑‑ really there might be something wrong with him.

PAT: And he flat‑out lies to protect those positions too.

GLENN: Yeah. Which is not like Harry Reid the way Harry Reid used to be.

PAT: No, I don't think so.

GLENN: Harry Reid I think used to be an honorable man. But I think, you know, look, I have a very good friend, Chris Stewart. He's gone into congress, and it's a very scary thing I think for Chris' family and his friends because Chris is truly a remarkable man and we all have already had the conversation as his friends and family. We start to see him go to the dark side, we start hearing him say the things, well, now, if I just stay on, if I just compromise here, I can get a position on this committee," we're having a family‑and‑friend intervention. And I've told him, I said, look, Chris, I'll ‑‑ to save you, I will do everything I can to rat you out.

PAT: Because we've seen some really good people do that already.

GLENN: Really good people.

PAT: And within a pretty short amount of time go from where we thought we could absolutely trust them to, not so much anymore.

GLENN: Yeah. And you know what's funny is they know. Because they don't call anymore. They used to ‑‑ they used to call and they used to tip us off and everything else. Not anymore. And they know we know. It's like, I really just think it's like alcoholics. You stay away ‑‑ if you're an alcoholic, you stay away from an alcoholic. If you are ‑‑ if you're lying to yourself again, you stay away from an alcoholic because an alcoholic has played that game before. They know. And so they will just, they will rat you out. And not to anybody else but to yourself. They will just say, "Wow. So how long you been drinking?" "I don't know what you're talking about." "Yes, you do." "I don't know what you're talking about." "Well, whatever. Call me when you're sober. Call me if you need help when you're sober. When you're back on track again, or want to get back on track. Don't waste my time." And the same thing. I mean, I've had conversations with a few of these guys to where they're starting to say those things. I mean, when you hear a guy say, "Yeah, but I can get on the committee. If I just do this, if I compromise here, I can get on the committee. They've promised me a committee."

PAT: Or I can be a ‑‑ I can chair the committee.

GLENN: Yeah. You know they're gone. They're gone. Because all you have to do is start compromising. If you want to compromise on something, just make sure it's not your principles. If it's not your principles, compromise. You have to. To move things forward, you have to compromise, but not your principles. And that's where they get lost. And I really think that once ‑‑ and especially if you go there and you do anything wrong. This is why I ‑‑ you pray for these guys, these new freshmen. Because I've heard really good things about the new freshmen. But they are being squashed and they are going to be either absorbed and brought into the GOP machine and promised all kinds of things; or they'll be destroyed. And the worst thing that happens is they're destroyed and then absorbed. And that means that if you aren't ‑‑ if you don't have the full armor of God on, you are not going to make it. Because there's going to be a temptation of money, of power, of sex. Whatever it is your Achilles heel. We all know. I mean, Pat, you don't have to say it, but do you know what your ‑‑ the thing that you are most tempted by as a man or as a person, what's the thing that you're most tempted by? Do you know what it is?

PAT: Sure.

GLENN: Jeffy, same thing?

JEFFY: One thing?

GLENN: Yeah. You're a nightmare. I do too. And it's ‑‑ and Jeffy's right. It's not just one thing. There's a few things that I have shields up because I'm freaked out by it. And I ask my wife all the time, "Honey, you ever start to see these warning signs, you go. Go, go, go, go, go." And most people will fool themselves. They will say, "Well, I'm going to be strong enough." Or they just don't think about it enough.

If you're going into Washington or if you're going to go on the front lines of the TEA Party or anything else, you better know what those weaknesses are. And you better concentrate on those weaknesses. And he will make weak things strong. On the other side, so will Satan. He will make those weak things strong in you. And that's what I ‑‑ the most dangerous thing is you go to Washington and let's say, you know, you're away from your wife and things are tough and maybe your wife, you haven't been getting along or anything. Is anybody watching Downtown Abbey? I'm watching this with my wife.

PAT: No.

GLENN: It's great. You'd love it, Pat, you actually would. You'd like it. But it's, there's this one part in the ‑‑ we're only on the second season and there's this guy who's really upstanding and really good, it's the end of World War I and his whole life has changed. Everything has changed. And his wife now all of a sudden is, you know, I'm going to go out and, you know, I'm going to go out and do stuff and I'm going to go chair this and I'm going to go work here. And his whole life has changed and he can't make sense of the world. And my wife and I are watching this episode and there's some maid, you know, in his house. And he did something nice for her, and it was totally legitimate, totally fine. And then the next time they see each other, she says, "By the way, thank you for helping on my son." And her husband I think is dead or gone to the war or something. And they just started having a conversation. And he says, I just don't understand my world anymore. And she says, I don't understand mine. Immediately my wife and I went, "Trouble. Trouble." Run for help. Run for help. And that's the way it happens. And once you do that, once you go down that road, in Washington you're surrounded by people that want that to happen. Because they will come to you and say, "Now listen. I can destroy you. But everybody makes a mistake. But if you play ball, I can help get you this position. You'll get this position and you'll be able to further the things you care about. Do you really think you're ever going to put that in the past? Never. The thing you would have to do is stand up and say, "I committed this. And if the people want to throw me out, throw me out because I did this and it was wrong. But I am ‑‑ I've got to get this out. Otherwise ‑‑ because they already have approached me with what I believe is blackmail, and I'm of no use you, I'm of no use if that happens." I'll let the people decide. And I think people will understand mistakes. You're destroyed either way. But at least you get out with your sole and maybe, maybe God can use you in some other position.

 

 

EXCLUSIVE: Tech Ethicist reveals 5 ways to control AI NOW

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.

How private stewardship could REVIVE America’s wild

Jonathan Newton / Contributor | Getty Images

The left’s idea of stewardship involves bulldozing bison and barring access. Lee’s vision puts conservation back in the hands of the people.

The media wants you to believe that Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) is trying to bulldoze Yellowstone and turn national parks into strip malls — that he’s calling for a reckless fire sale of America’s natural beauty to line developers’ pockets. That narrative is dishonest. It’s fearmongering, and, by the way, it’s wrong.

Here’s what’s really happening.

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized.

The federal government currently owns 640 million acres of land — nearly 28% of all land in the United States. To put that into perspective, that’s more territory than France, Germany, Poland, and the United Kingdom combined.

Most of this land is west of the Mississippi River. That’s not a coincidence. In the American West, federal ownership isn’t just a bureaucratic technicality — it’s a stranglehold. States are suffocated. Locals are treated as tenants. Opportunities are choked off.

Meanwhile, people living east of the Mississippi — in places like Kentucky, Georgia, or Pennsylvania — might not even realize how little land their own states truly control. But the same policies that are plaguing the West could come for them next.

Lee isn’t proposing to auction off Yellowstone or pave over Yosemite. He’s talking about 3 million acres — that’s less than half of 1% of the federal estate. And this land isn’t your family’s favorite hiking trail. It’s remote, hard to access, and often mismanaged.

Failed management

Why was it mismanaged in the first place? Because the federal government is a terrible landlord.

Consider Yellowstone again. It’s home to the last remaining herd of genetically pure American bison — animals that haven’t been crossbred with cattle. Ranchers, myself included, would love the chance to help restore these majestic creatures on private land. But the federal government won’t allow it.

So what do they do when the herd gets too big?

They kill them. Bulldoze them into mass graves. That’s not conservation. That’s bureaucratic malpractice.

And don’t even get me started on bald eagles — majestic symbols of American freedom and a federally protected endangered species, now regularly slaughtered by wind turbines. I have pictures of piles of dead bald eagles. Where’s the outrage?

Biden’s federal land-grab

Some argue that states can’t afford to manage this land themselves. But if the states can’t afford it, how can Washington? We’re $35 trillion in debt. Entitlements are strained, infrastructure is crumbling, and the Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, and National Park Service are billions of dollars behind in basic maintenance. Roads, firebreaks, and trails are falling apart.

The Biden administration quietly embraced something called the “30 by 30” initiative, a plan to lock up 30% of all U.S. land and water under federal “conservation” by 2030. The real goal is 50% by 2050.

That entails half of the country being taken away from you, controlled not by the people who live there but by technocrats in D.C.

You think that won’t affect your ability to hunt, fish, graze cattle, or cut timber? Think again. It won’t be conservatives who stop you from building a cabin, raising cattle, or teaching your grandkids how to shoot a rifle. It’ll be the same radical environmentalists who treat land as sacred — unless it’s your truck, your deer stand, or your back yard.

Land as collateral

Moreover, the U.S. Treasury is considering putting federally owned land on the national balance sheet, listing your parks, forests, and hunting grounds as collateral.

What happens if America defaults on its debt?

David McNew / Stringer | Getty Images

Do you think our creditors won’t come calling? Imagine explaining to your kids that the lake you used to fish in is now under foreign ownership, that the forest you hunted in belongs to China.

This is not hypothetical. This is the logical conclusion of treating land like a piggy bank.

The American way

There’s a better way — and it’s the American way.

Let the people who live near the land steward it. Let ranchers, farmers, sportsmen, and local conservationists do what they’ve done for generations.

Did you know that 75% of America’s wetlands are on private land? Or that the most successful wildlife recoveries — whitetail deer, ducks, wild turkeys — didn’t come from Washington but from partnerships between private landowners and groups like Ducks Unlimited?

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized. When you break it, you fix it. When you profit from the land, you protect it.

This is not about selling out. It’s about buying in — to freedom, to responsibility, to the principle of constitutional self-governance.

So when you hear the pundits cry foul over 3 million acres of federal land, remember: We don’t need Washington to protect our land. We need Washington to get out of the way.

Because this isn’t just about land. It’s about liberty. And once liberty is lost, it doesn’t come back easily.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.