Michele Bachmann: Don't forget about the immigration bill

Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN) spoke with Stu and Pat on radio this morning, and she warned that the immigration bill is still being pushed through behind-the-scenes even though no one is paying attention to it right now. Rep. Bachmann warns that a flowery sounding bill will ultimately be presented, but she advised that no matter what is put forth it should be voted against.

Read a full transcript of the interview below:

PAT: Congresswoman Michele Bachmann joins us today. There's the debate still going on, and we forget about this sometimes because other things come up in our lives and we forget that the Senate has passed an immigration reform bill that is nightmarish and then, you know, so we let our guard down and then pretty soon you know it's coming up in the House and so we thought we'd check in with her and see where that stands right now. And earlier this week Congressman Bachmann congresswoman Bachmann, you spoke on the house floor and your one of your main points was seal the border first, then we'll work on amnesty afterward, which seems so incredibly reasonable to almost all Americans and yet it's not being considered. How did that go over? Where does all this stand right now?

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: Well, Pat and Stu, thanks for having me on because we really are at the crucial hour right now. It seems that some sort of a weird tack has been made between the ruling class and D.C. That's both Republican and Democrat. And it seems like they've made a decision that this is it. Everyone is going to help Obama achieve his number one political agenda item, which is to bring in tens of millions of new voters to support his agenda. Why in the world any self respecting Republican would want to get behind this effort is beyond me, but it seems like this is what they want to do. Their first worry is not border security. The Senate bill was a fake border security bill. We were betrayed and lied to by the Republicans in the Senate. So we don't have a border security bill. And the way that you pass a bill is you've got to get a bill through the Senate, a bill through the House and on the president's desk. Well, two out of the three are effectively done. We know that the president will sign a bill that has amnesty in it. The Senate already passed it. Now it's up to the House. So what is about to happen to the House is that we're going to get what I call a Trojan horse. It will be a bill that will sound great, it will be all about border security, and who couldn't get behind that? But if that bill passes with the help of conservatives out of the House, it goes to what's called a conference committee. Because the bill won't be the same as the bill that came out of the Senate. That's where the politicians get together behind closed doors and they figure out one compromised bill that goes back to the chamber. Well, the one must have for President Obama is legalization, and legalization equals amnesty, which equals citizenship, which equals tens of millions of new voters that will vote to forever cement in place his progressive agenda. This is where the whole thing breaks down. So we have not had one minute of discussion for the whole Republican conference in the House.

Now recognize we're the only backstop that can say no, and we haven't had a minute's worth of discussion. We're going to finally, this afternoon at 3:00 Eastern time, have our very first meeting on this issue of immigration and what the Republican establishment is planning to do is introduce their two bills, the one out of judiciary, and the one out of Homeland Security† the Trojan horse bill, which is what I call it† and they will tell us look at this bill and how great the bill is, but the fact is it will never, ever come back to us for final vote in that form. And what I'm going to do is not vote for any bill, no matter how good it sounds, because right now we're lacking the political will in the White House to ever support and ever enforce border security. We saw that this week with the president. He decided he didn't want to enforce parts of ObamaCare. So he's not going to. It's unconstitutional, but he's getting away with it. And so that's what's going to happen.

We already passed a bill to build 700 miles of fence in 2006 and we paid for it. And so my question is, if we already passed a bill to build a fence, where is it? Where's the money? Where's the fence? Where's the billions? I want my billions back. Either give me a fence or give me my billions back.

STU: Michelle, you're

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: So we've already done that seven years ago. And if 27 years ago we promised that we would build a fence, why when Barack Obama's president and when Janet Napolitano would be the chief enforcer of building a fence, I mean, on what planet would we ever think that this is going to happen? And so it's time to wake up and slap some reality on your face and recognize this has nothing to do about with border security. It has everything to do with giving Barack Obama tens of millions of new progressive voters to finally change the country once and forever so that constitutional conservatives will effectively be blocked out of the marketplace of ideas in the future because, just because of numbers. There won't be enough of us.

So this is very big. This is very real. I'm not here to cry wolf. This is probably the most important vote that we're going to take in the next two years and, quite frankly, we haven't seen the phone lines melt yet in Washington. And so what I just want to encourage your listeners at Glenn Beck to do is that on the Senate side is hopeless. Give up on them. Don't even bother calling them on this. We've been betrayed. Focus only on the House because I will tell you, you would be shocked at the number of people who are Republicans, who call themselves conservatives, who are in favor of an amnesty bill. You would be floored. So we need these phone lines melted and quick because the establishment wants to get this bill passed out of the House before August. And so right now my message is simple: No bill. No immigration bill. Until we can certify and see it for ourselves that that southern border is secure, there's nothing to talk about.

STU: And Michele, you only need a couple dozen Republicans here, right? You only need a couple dozen Republicans to entertain these ideas to† because the Democrats are all, of course, going to vote for it. So it's not even the fact that you need to win everybody over. They only need to pull a couple dozen from the establishment and they can get this thing passed, right?

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: Thank you for saying that because that's what's going to happen with the Trojan horse. You're right. We passed this sweet smelling bill out of the house, it goes to conference committee, it comes back. Pelosi and all† and nearly every Democrat will vote for the bill. So just like you said, Pat and Stu, all the Democrats need are a few Republicans who think they are being magnanimous, a couple dozen, and we lose. And the country changes forever. So this is crucial. It's really gone under the radar because we've been kind of overhyped with news lately. You know, with everything from a plane crash, everything else going on, people just aren't paying attention to this issue and that's why we† again, I'm not trying to cry wolf. I'm just saying that this is it, and this is going to come up very quick. It's going to slide through without a lot of fanfare. The mainstream media certainly doesn't want to talk about it because they want it to pass and so this is it. I mean, we need base conservatives to call their members. And don't assume just because you have a Republican member of congress that they're good on this issue. Get them on the record. Make them tell you that they won't vote for any bill. Because President Obama's already proved it. He's not going to enforce a law that he doesn't agree with. He's an unconstitutional acting president. And so that's why this is so crucial.

PAT: Now, if they call† and they can call 202 224 3121. That's the Capitol Hill switchboard.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: Yes.

PAT: Does it do any good, Michele, to call other people's reps, or are you suggesting they just call their own and make sure their own representative is on board with this thing?

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: Call your own. That's the most important†

PAT: Yeah.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: -- for people to do. But people also have a contact list on their computer, their smart phone or their iPad, and what I'm saying too is send that, put out on your Facebook or put out a tweet or send out to your contact list just a quick, you know, one sentence or couple of paragraphs. You know, just trust me on this, you've got to call your rep and tell them don't vote for any immigration bill, not until we get a fence built. Because I don't want any more promises. I want to see an actual sense that's actually doing the job because otherwise the bill that we will get will be perpetual amnesty. Until never again be any effective deportation done ever, and we will have ongoing amnesty. And we are literally looking at letting more people in, in the next ten years than we did in the previous 40. And amnesty isn't cheap. It will be over $6 trillion. Half of that alone will just pay for retirement benefits for illegal aliens. So the worst possible time, when we're $17 trillion in debt, and that's just part of the debt. When we're $17 trillion in debt and baby boomers like me are about to draw down on Social Security and Medicare benefits that we've earned and paid in for, we're looking at tens of millions of new people coming into the country who've never paid in and yet they'll be drawing down Social Security. They'll be drawing down Medicare. And they will have the right to bring in their parents who can draw down from Social Security and from Medicare. And just so you know, one portion of Medicare is said to be bankrupt. The hospital portion will be bankrupt by 2017. That's four years from now. So the one thing seniors fear is going to the hospital because they want to know that their Medicare will pay for it. Well, it's broke in four years. And so we're going to swamp the system with tens of millions of new people who are sicker and poorer and have no means of paying their hospital bills? This is a disaster and that's why we've got to stop it in its tracks and so we are putting everything right now into this effort to let the public know that you cannot trust your own member of congress on this issue. You have to be adamant. You have to be insistent. You have to call, call, call. You have to get everybody that you know to call, call, call and say, look, we're not putting up with any state border security bills. We can't trust the president to enforce the border and so we are not going to take up anything right now until you build us a fence. Build me the fence. Where is my fence that I paid for in 2006? Give me my fence or give me my money back. That's my message.

PAT: Appreciate it, Michele. And thank you. Thank you for what you're doing. Thanks, and tell Steve king and Louie Gohmert, the three of you are spearheading this thing, thank you for what you're doing. And there's about 70 representatives who are on board with stopping any bill from being passed in the House for all the reasons that Michele just so eloquently outlined. Appreciate it. Thanks a lot. We'll talk to you again soon. 202 224 3121 is the number to call to get in touch with your representatives. That's the Capitol Hill switchboard. And then just ask for your representative. And if you don't know who your representative is, Google it. It's really not that hard to find. We can't tell you who your rep is because we're not positive where you're listening right now. So, you know, just find that out. Call your representative. Hopefully you voted for†

STU: Yeah.

PAT: or against your representative. So you know.

STU: You should probably know at this point, yeah.

PAT: But the number is 202 224 3121. And it is important. Because if they pass any bill, then they reconcile the Senate bill with the House bill and that's where the trouble comes in. It comes in, in the compromise and the reconciliation process and then you've got something that we can't live with. And it's amnesty without any border security.

STU: Yeah.

PAT: And it's going to turn out to be a nightmare.

STU: And two things to think about how important the left feels this is, and as well as Michele correctly pointed out over and over again, the Republican establishment. How important is this stuff to them? First of all, remember, the president of the United States wanted the DREAM Act so badly, as did many people who were in the Republican establishment and they tried so hard to get it and then they just did it because they couldn't get it voted in. So they just did it by executive order. And then the 2006 bill she talked about, that was a bill that was passed, 700 miles of fencing, and then they just passed something else the next year in part of another big bill that said, well, we don't really have to build that fence. This is what they'll do.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: They will do anything they can.

PAT: And they got the same provision in this new Senate thing, too, that Napolitano can call it off and, you know, she will again.

STU: Of course.

PAT: She just will.

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.

Could China OWN our National Parks?

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.