Glenn excoriates NY Governor for telling ‘extreme conservatives’ to get out

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo made headlines over the weekend for comments he made about “extreme conservatives” in New York State. During an interview with Susan Arbetter on WCNY radio on Friday, Cuomo criticized “right-to-life,” “pro-assault weapon,” “anti-gay” conservatives:

CUOMO: The Republican Party candidates are running against the SAFE Act — it was voted for by moderate Republicans who run the Senate! Their problem is not me and the Democrats; their problem is themselves. Who are they? Are they these extreme conservatives who are right-to-life, pro-assault-weapon, anti-gay? Is that who they are? Because if that’s who they are and they’re the extreme conservatives, they have no place in the state of New York, because that’s not who New Yorkers are.

Cuomo did lend his support to the “moderate Republicans” that have consistently worked with Democrats to pass his agenda. But he urged the “extreme conservatives” to “figure out if your extreme conservative philosophy can survive in this state and the answer is no.”

On radio this morning, Glenn questioned whether or not the New York outpost of TheBlaze would still be welcome in the state given the company’s pro-life, pro-Second Amendment stance. Furthermore, Glenn questioned what Cuomo meant by the term “anti-gay” for he couldn’t think anyone who is against a homosexual’s right to live and work in society.

The governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo, said some conservatives have no place in the state of New York. ‘Extreme conservative’ – the right-to-life, pro-assault weapon, and anti-gay have no place in the state of New York because that's not what we as New Yorkers are.

Wow, I didn't know you could speak for everybody in New York. And I don't even know what ‘anti-gay’ means. You'll have to be more specific because I'm the guy who holds two out of those three opinions. They're the first two. The third is: I stand with members of GLAAD or anybody who is a fascist and says you don't have a right to live, you don't have a right to work, you don't have a right to pursue your happiness. I'll stand against anybody who is a fascist, whether it's a heterofascist or a homofascist. I'll stand against you. And I will join with anybody who understands what fascism is because I still find these things self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they're endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights. And nobody can change them.

Now, Andrew Cuomo says, who are these extreme conservatives who are right to life, pro-assault weapon and anti-gay… because that's not who New Yorkers are. Well, I'd like to ask a few questions.

If you're a moderate conservative, does that mean you're okay with killing half the babies? Is there a number, Governor Cuomo, because right-to-life doesn't make you a moderate to, say, half the babies? By the way, the numbers in your state fall apart… Right now it is up to five months… you can come in and kill your baby. But once you go above five months, everything starts to change with your constituents… Most people will say they're absolutely pro-life, with an exception of incest, rape, and life of the mother. That's where the numbers start to really get strong. And that doesn't seem extremist. That seems rational to me. That seems like somebody who has a heart. Now, I know there are a lot of people that say, I don't agree with that. And quite honestly, Governor, I wish I could join them. I wish I could be that way. But my heart won't let me join them… But I don't condemn them… I want to learn from them. And I might find that they're absolutely right. I might find that they're absolutely wrong. But I will decide that.

When it comes to the Second Amendment, let me ask you something: What kind of gun is okay? Because if I take the metal or the plastic off of an AR, I pretty much have a deer rifle. It's only that we've spray painted them black and made them look spooky. Yes, they're semi-automatics, but so are semi-automatic guns. Lee Harvey Oswald killed with the bolt action, so he had to put another round in the chamber himself. But look at the damage he did. So where is the line here? Is it only the ones that are spooky looking and painted black? Are deer rifles okay? And if I made an AR look like a deer rifle, I'm sure, Governor, you wouldn't know the difference. Would that be okay? I want to know where the line is on guns because I really thought abortions should be safe and rare. I thought that was your position. Now it's anybody who is pro-life is an extremist. Right now you're saying ‘assault weapons’, but all of the laws that are being enacted in the state of New York are not just against assault weapons. They're against any weapon.

And I'm sorry, Governor, but I don't know anybody who is anti-gay. And if they do, I would be the first to point them out and say, ‘That person hates gay people because they're gay.’ There are gay people that I don't like. It has nothing to do with their sexuality. There are straight people I don't like. It has nothing to do with they're sexuality. I think basing your like and dislike on somebody's sexuality is one of the most moronic things I've heard. How about on this Martin Luther King, Jr. Day we judge the man by the content of his character… because I have a dream today that someday liberals and conservatives, our children can go and play together, and learn together, and be together. I have a dream today that I'm not a second-class citizen in this country.

My good friend, Pastor Hutcherson, died a few months ago. He was a black man who watched the freedom buses burn. He watched them burn. He watched his own people beaten. He hated Martin Luther King when he was young because he wanted revenge. And then he found the Lord. And that changed his heart. He no longer wanted revenge. He was thirsty for love. And he spent his whole life trying to find people who are like-minded, that understood anger and rage is not the answer. Love is the answer. If you say that people who are pro-life, pro-assault weapon, and however you define anti-gay don’t have a place in your society and in your state, I don't think I have a place in your state… I don't want to live in a country where we round people up for their opinion. The arrogance is astounding from the left.

Cuomo’s office has since come out and said the governor’s comments were “distorted.” The office points to another portion of the interview in which Cuomo says “it is fine” to oppose gun control measures and to be anti-abortion, adding that “he respects both positions.”

You can listen to the entire interview HERE. (Applicable audio begins around 9 minute 20 seconds)

Front page image courtesy of the AP

Glenn's daughter honors Charlie Kirk with emotional tribute song

MELISSA MAJCHRZAK / Contributor | Getty Images

On September 17th, Glenn commemorated his late friend Charlie Kirk by hosting The Charlie Kirk Show Podcast, where he celebrated and remembered the life of a remarkable young man.

During the broadcast, Glenn shared an emotional new song performed by his daughter, Cheyenne, who was standing only feet away from Charlie when he was assassinated. The song, titled "We Are One," has been dedicated to Charlie Kirk as a tribute and was written and co-performed by David Osmond, son of Alan Osmond, founding member of The Osmonds.

Glenn first asked David Osmond to write "We Are One" in 2018, as he predicted that dark days were on the horizon, but he never imagined that it would be sung by his daughter in honor of Charlie Kirk. The Lord works in mysterious ways; could there have been a more fitting song to honor such a brave man?

"We Are One" is available for download or listening on Spotify HERE


Murder is NOT debate: The line America cannot cross

CHARLY TRIBALLEAU / Contributor | Getty Images

Celebrating murder is not speech. It is a revelation of the heart. America must distinguish between debate and the glorification of evil.

Over the weekend, the world mourned the murder of Charlie Kirk. In London, crowds filled the streets, chanting “Charlie! Charlie! Charlie!” and holding up pictures of the fallen conservative giant. Protests in his honor spread as far away as South Korea. This wasn’t just admiration for one man; it was a global acknowledgment that courage and conviction — the kind embodied by Kirk during his lifetime — still matter. But it was also a warning. This is a test for our society, our morality, and our willingness to defend truth.

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni recently delivered a speech that struck at the heart of this crisis. She praised Kirk as a man who welcomed debate, who smiled while defending his ideas, and who faced opposition with respect. That courage is frightening to those who have no arguments. When reason fails, the weapons left are insults, criminalization, and sometimes violence. We see it again today, in the wake of Charlie Kirk’s assassination.

Charlie Kirk’s life was a challenge. His death is a call.

Some professors and public intellectuals have written things that should chill every American soul. They argue that shooting a right-wing figure is somehow less serious than murdering others. They suggest it could be mitigated because of political disagreement. These aren’t careless words — they are a rationalization for murder.

Some will argue that holding such figures accountable is “cancel culture.” They will say that we are silencing debate. They are wrong. Accountability is not cancel culture. A critical difference lies between debating ideas and celebrating death. Debate challenges minds. Celebrating murder abandons humanity. Charlie Kirk’s death draws that line sharply.

History offers us lessons. In France, mobs cheered executions as the guillotine claimed the heads of their enemies — and their own heads soon rolled. Cicero begged his countrymen to reason, yet the mob chose blood over law, and liberty was lost. Charlie Kirk’s assassination reminds us that violence ensues when virtue is abandoned.

We must also distinguish between debates over policy and attacks on life itself. A teacher who argues that children should not undergo gender-transition procedures before adulthood participates in a policy debate. A person who says Charlie Kirk’s death is a victory rejoices in violence. That person has no place shaping minds or guiding children.

PATRICK T. FALLON / Contributor | Getty Images

For liberty and virtue

Liberty without virtue is national suicide. The Constitution protects speech — even dangerous ideas — but it cannot shield those who glorify murder. Society has the right to demand virtue from its leaders, educators, and public figures. Charlie Kirk’s life was a challenge. His death is a call. It is a call to defend our children, our communities, and the principles that make America free.

Cancel culture silences debate. But accountability preserves it. A society that distinguishes between debating ideas and celebrating death still has a moral compass. It still has hope. It still has us.

Are Gen Z's socialist sympathies a threat to America's future?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

In a republic forged on the anvil of liberty and self-reliance, where generations have fought to preserve free markets against the siren song of tyranny, Gen Z's alarming embrace of socialism amid housing crises and economic despair has sparked urgent alarm. But in a recent poll, Glenn asked the tough questions: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from—and what does it mean for America's future? Glenn asked, and you answered—hundreds weighed in on this volatile mix of youthful frustration and ideological peril.

The results paint a stark picture of distrust in the system. A whopping 79% of you affirm that Gen Z's socialist sympathies stem from real economic gripes, like sky-high housing costs and a rigged game tilted toward the elite and corporations—defying the argument that it's just youthful naivety. Even more telling, 97% believe this trend arises from a glaring educational void on socialism's bloody historical track record, where failed regimes have crushed freedoms under the boot of big government. And 97% see these poll findings as a harbinger of deepening generational rifts, potentially fueling political chaos and authoritarian overreach if left unchecked.

Your verdict underscores a moral imperative: America's soul hangs on reclaiming timeless values like self-reliance and liberty. This feedback amplifies your concerns, sending a clear message to the powers that be.

Want to make your voice heard? Check out more polls HERE.

Civics isn’t optional—America's survival depends on it

JEFF KOWALSKY / Contributor | Getty Images

Every vote, jury duty, and act of engagement is civics in action, not theory. The republic survives only when citizens embrace responsibility.

I slept through high school civics class. I memorized the three branches of government, promptly forgot them, and never thought of that word again. Civics seemed abstract, disconnected from real life. And yet, it is critical to maintaining our republic.

Civics is not a class. It is a responsibility. A set of habits, disciplines, and values that make a country possible. Without it, no country survives.

We assume America will survive automatically, but every generation must learn to carry the weight of freedom.

Civics happens every time you speak freely, worship openly, question your government, serve on a jury, or cast a ballot. It’s not a theory or just another entry in a textbook. It’s action — the acts we perform every day to be a positive force in society.

Many of us recoil at “civic responsibility.” “I pay my taxes. I follow the law. I do my civic duty.” That’s not civics. That’s a scam, in my opinion.

Taking up the torch

The founders knew a republic could never run on autopilot. And yet, that’s exactly what we do now. We assume it will work, then complain when it doesn’t. Meanwhile, the people steering the country are driving it straight into a mountain — and they know it.

Our founders gave us tools: separation of powers, checks and balances, federalism, elections. But they also warned us: It won’t work unless we are educated, engaged, and moral.

Are we educated, engaged, and moral? Most Americans cannot even define a republic, never mind “keep one,” as Benjamin Franklin urged us to do after the Constitutional Convention.

We fought and died for the republic. Gaining it was the easy part. Keeping it is hard. And keeping it is done through civics.

Start small and local

In our homes, civics means teaching our children the Constitution, our history, and that liberty is not license — it is the space to do what is right. In our communities, civics means volunteering, showing up, knowing your sheriff, attending school board meetings, and understanding the laws you live under. When necessary, it means challenging them.

How involved are you in your local community? Most people would admit: not really.

Civics is learned in practice. And it starts small. Be honest in your business dealings. Speak respectfully in disagreement. Vote in every election, not just the presidential ones. Model citizenship for your children. Liberty is passed down by teaching and example.

Samuel Corum / Stringer | Getty Images

We assume America will survive automatically, but every generation must learn to carry the weight of freedom.

Start with yourself. Study the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and state laws. Study, act, serve, question, and teach. Only then can we hope to save the republic. The next election will not fix us. The nation will rise or fall based on how each of us lives civics every day.

Civics isn’t a class. It’s the way we protect freedom, empower our communities, and pass down liberty to the next generation.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.